If you are non deployable, you shouldn't be able to get promoted. What do you think?

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 02:35:53 -0400

I think being non deployable is the worst thing in the Army. Nothing worst than watching your Soldiers board the plane to deploy and you are in the rear.
I used to work for a SFC that was non deployable and couldn't even wear her vest lol. I was like seriously, why are you even here? Why are you training us on anything and will not be there when it matters the most?
In my eyes if you are non deployable i don't see why the Army doesn't start a chapter packet on the SM or Leader and send them to the house.
There is another way for the Army to downsize right there.
I think you shouldn't be able to get promoted either. Deploying is the biggest and main part of the being a Soldier. Going to war when needed. If you can't go to war or the freaking field for a field problem then why should you be promoted?

Response by SGT Donald Croswhite made May 4 at 2014 5:22 AM

SGT Donald Croswhite — Sun, 04 May 2014 05:22:16 -0400

If you’re non-deployable you should either be chaptered or reclassed to noncombat arms MOS, based on your commander's decision. And yes, if there is a reason that you are non-deployable then you probably aren’t much use to the Army.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 7:44 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 07:44:31 -0400

I believe that would depend on whether or not the soldier was on a permanant undeployable status or just temporary like I was after my last knee surgery.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 7:47 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 07:47:37 -0400

I agree that some people try to make themselves non deployable and to that I say get rid of them. However I know some outstanding leaders that are currently non deployable due to injuries from previous deployments. It was not their fault nor their request for that rating but they are still valuable leaders that can provide valuable insight to new soldiers about deployments.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 9:58 AM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 09:58:53 -0400

It's hard to make a blanket statement like this. Certainly if a soldier is temporarily non deployable, that soldier should be given adequate time to recover. Those that are on a permanent non deployable status, however, would need to be analyzed on a case by case basis. There are many strong leaders with invaluable knowledge and experience who are not physically capable of carrying a rucksack. I think the method to downsize those non deployable soldiers would need to be based on such factors as: time in grade and service, ratings (ERS), promotable status, and the reason for non deployment. Another option for those soldiers could be a transfer to TRADOC or other non deployable duty assignments.

Response by SPC Robert Walo made May 4 at 2014 11:00 AM

SPC Robert Walo — Sun, 04 May 2014 11:00:52 -0400

First of all without having people in the rear to keep training and supplying the "deployed" you wouldn't last very long, for when what you carried with you runs out, or when one of your buddies catches one and you have no one to replace. Him, then you understand why there are non- deplorable a there.

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made May 4 at 2014 12:09 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Sun, 04 May 2014 12:09:41 -0400

There's a Soldier I knew that acquired HIV from a blood transfusion...couldn't deploy. This Soldier should never get promoted?

In your mind, this Soldier should continue to be discriminated against and punished for having HIV?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 12:10 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 12:10:41 -0400

I will take a non deployable professional NCO over a deployable unprofessional toxic leader. There are plenty of non deployable jobs in the army that need quality NCOs to keep the mission running. There is no room in this army for individuals who think that their status makes them better then others.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 12:36 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 12:36:53 -0400

My opinion is that I guess it would depend on the the reason he or she is not deployable. Is it a weight issue, or were they injured? A blanket yes or no doesn't really work.

Response by MSgt Keith Hebert made May 4 at 2014 12:38 PM

MSgt Keith Hebert — Sun, 04 May 2014 12:38:57 -0400

SFC I have to disagree with you. There are positions where that NCOs ability can be used.
The blanket statement is erroneous and can be harmful.
So I ask the question should the SM with a permanent profile against running be discharged cause he can't do the run?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 12:51 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 12:51:52 -0400

I am non-deployable because I just got back (Oct 2013) from a year long tour in Korea AND I am retiring this year due to RCP. Clearly I am such a horrible Soldier that after nearly 23 years I need to be kicked out??? With all due respect SFC Thomas but that is a bunch of hogwash. I arrived to the unit in December 2013 and my unit left the following month. After speaking to the Rear-D SGM and my BN leadership, the decision was made to keep me back due to the two above circumstances. I DID NOT "beg" to not deploy but made my concerns known since I am being FORCED to retire (another subject). The sad thing is, as the Rear-D S4 AND Supply Sergeant, I control FIVE Hand Receipts, doing COPA and ADL turn-ins, and trying to get things ordered for each Troop to have a good supply package for when they return. All the above is normally done by ELEVEN total personnel but I'm doing it by myself (although just recently I got a non-supply Soldier to help) yet I don't deserve to be promoted??? SMH!!!

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 1:01 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 13:01:47 -0400

Amazed at the dialog on this thread.

I remember my "tunnel vision" of everyone must go mentality. It took some CSM's and peers to pull me aside to realize that everyone has a piece of the pie when we think combat multiplier. Also, leaving Fort Bragg, NC and coming to the strategic side. The "non-deployable" Soldier/NCO should be dealt with, and that is the units responsibilities. However, that individual is the one providing the rear element support whether you like it or not. Which in you're case, these individuals are worthless, being honest and to the point.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 1:34 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 13:34:28 -0400

It's not a bad idea, but in application, it doesn't pan out. There are a myriad of things that can make you non-deployable for any amount of time. For instance, my whole brigade went on block leave for 3 weeks, and returned to head to JRTC immediately. They were gone almost 2 months. Because they had all taken care of their dental they year before, a quarter of the brigade became an MRC 3B for dental, and were non-deployable. To add to it, the dental clinic can only handle a limited number of Soldiers. The last time I went, I was told there were no appointments for the next 3 weeks, and I should return in 1 week to "hopefully" be able to schedule an appointment 3 weeks out.

I have a guy in my unit, outstanding NCO, who shattered his vertebrae on a jump. I don't think it would be right to tell him he is non-promotable because he injured himself training and will have a long road to recovery ahead of him.

Response by CPT Marc Serrá made May 4 at 2014 1:58 PM

CPT Marc Serrá — Sun, 04 May 2014 13:58:12 -0400

I could see looking at non-deployables for possible discharge....can someone say "med-board", but certainly not removing them all.

I was medically non-deployable due to an admin error that took me two years to get fixed - all because an admin misread the doctor's writing. Under your proposed system, I would have been kicked out during that time with no questions asked.

There are always shades of gray...and there needs to be.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made May 4 at 2014 3:26 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Sun, 04 May 2014 15:26:18 -0400

So here's my 37 cents. How about a few years ago before we were at war? When there was no war did it matter that you weren't deployable? I actually had some of my best leaders before the war even started. In essence we were all non-deployable in the sense that there was no war to deploy to. I don't think that just because you don't deploy, for whatever reason doesn't mean you cannot be a leader or that you shouldn't be promoted.
Do I think you could be a better leader after being deployed? Absolutely. But I don't think because you can't deploy doesn't mean you can't lead in garrison.

Response by SSG V. Michelle Woods made May 4 at 2014 5:06 PM

SSG V. Michelle Woods — Sun, 04 May 2014 17:06:39 -0400

SFC Thomas

I've learned some incredible and invaluable lessons from leaders who are no longer deployable. Compassion and seeing the bigger picture would be some of those lessons.
Perhaps taking a leadership position in rear-D would force you to see that not all non deployable Soldiers are useless to the Army. Any leader worth his salt probably feels horrible enough seeing his troops go down range without him.

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made May 4 at 2014 5:24 PM

COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM — Sun, 04 May 2014 17:24:05 -0400

A few points reference non deployables and this dialogue that I hope everyone can agree with. 1. The mission of the US Army is to fight and win our nation's wars. 2. In order to win our nation's wars, the Army must have Soldiers who are deployable. 3. Not having the opportunity to deploy and being non deployable are two separate issues. 4. If the Army is the cause of a Soldier being non deployable (such as injury) then the Army has an obligation to either get the Soldier deployable again or to transition the Soldier out of the Army if becoming deployable again is not possible. 5. As with most things, the theory is easy but the application is hard. That is why local level leaders need to balance the needs of the individual with the needs of the Army. The needs of the Army, however, must take precedence.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 6:13 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 18:13:39 -0400

SFC Thomas,

You are dealing only in absolutes. I agree Soldiers must be able to deploy, however stating a Soldier who is not deployable should not be a leader/have Soldiers is shortsighted and absolute. If anyone who became non-deployable had to give up their leadership position (particular senior NCOS or mid to senior officer) everyone would be constantly having to complete COR NCOER/OER's...the example I give is somewhat sarcastic but has some truth to it.

I do find it troublesome when I see a SGM (or such) with no combat patch or deployments. There are some few legitimate examples of this (although I cant think of one) but I see far too many examples of this.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 6:30 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 18:30:37 -0400

So SFC, what if you were deployed and were injured out in the field? Does the SPC who saved lives by putting his own in danger not deserve promotion?

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 6:50 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 18:50:34 -0400

If Soldiers at "non-deployable" because if injuries physical or mental then they should be allowed to get promoted if they meet the guidelines. Soldiers who dodge deploying but are capable should be sent to fort couch.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 8:56 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 20:56:23 -0400

Some good discussion, but here is my perspective. I am sure we are all aware of the various positions on post or in IMA that are stateside, non-deploying units that are permanently garrisoned. Also, how many staff positions in garrison are staffed by civilians that could as easily be staffed by non-deployable Soldiers.

The sentiment that a Soldier that becomes medically non-deployable becomes unuseful is the perspective of a soldier who doesn't understand the big picture.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 4 at 2014 10:13 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 04 May 2014 22:13:54 -0400

If you are non-deployable, I don't see any reason why they can't get promoted. But, if they cannot be deployed, then they should be getting medically retired or just getting put out on regular medical, depending on why they are non-deployable.

Response by 1SG Frank Rocha made May 4 at 2014 11:26 PM

1SG Frank Rocha — Sun, 04 May 2014 23:26:59 -0400

Being injured to the extent that it prevents you from being a force multiplier, and by extension a liability to the effectiveness of a unit to accomplish its mission is not we as professionals have the option of not taking seriously. The goal, however would be to put that soldier on a path to correct that Medical not deployable (MND) deficiency to the extent that they join the rest of the unit on the field of battle and do the job they signed up to do.

There are 3 groups I separate these into. Those whose deficiency can be corrected and they are making, and continue to make, every effort to correct that deficiency. Those whose deficiency can be corrected and they are not making much of an effort to correct it. the last is those with an uncorrectable deficiency but make every effort to stay and find a way to contribute, join their unit overseas and serve their country anyway despite the injury.

In any of those cases we as professionals have no business judging them or creating an atmosphere of mistrust because they were injured. Scrutinizing a soldier due to an injury they sustained does nobody any good and it certainly isn't going to inspire that soldier to magically get healed overnight. Let the system do what it was designed to do. The doctors know what they are doing. The command should know what they are doing. As long as they do that soldier right and do their due diligence it will all work out for the good of the unit, the army, the country and most importantly the soldier.

As far as promotion is concerned I would have to say that a perennial deployment dodger provision should have a place in the promotion system but even then they would have to be a confirmed multiple violator that has taken very little, or no, action to correct a correctable deficiency.

Response by CH (MAJ) Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2014 4:34 AM

CH (MAJ) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 05 May 2014 04:34:47 -0400

This is an interesting conversation. My thoughts are these. We fight wars. Everything else is preparation for fighting wars. So when someone is unable to deploy, engage and destroy the enemy, that Soldier ceases to fulfill his or her purpose as a Soldier.

In every case, I believe this is true. Now, before people get their drawers in a knot, let's talk it through.

The Army shouldn't discriminate with a flag.
To begin with, one should be deployable unless there is a serious limiting disability. Hearing, cholesterol, family care plan and the like should not exempt a Soldier from deployment.

So when a serious limiting disability does exist, I believe the Army has an obligation to REHABILITATE if possible. Recommending a chapter for shin splint or stress fractures doesn't seem appropriate. It's an Army value called Loyalty.

If the Soldier cannot or will not be rehabilitated, then the Army should SEPARATE, the individual, regardless of the merits of their former service. Is the person a wise old Soldier with untold combat experience and leadership insight? Let her write a book or go on a motivational speaking tour and let some one who is able bodied take her place and fight wars.

Finally, if we must separate Soldiers because of line-of-duty injuries or other disability not arising from their own misconduct or irresponsibility (as establishes by a Medical Evaluation Board), then we must COMPENSATE the Soldier for lost income based on their current rank and years of service.

Though it's hard to see sometimes, and there is always some personal anecdote to point to the flaws, this is our system. It's what we are doing now. Sure, there is a food blister just stretching the limits of ACU fabric elasticity in that other platoon, but by and large we are rehabilitating or separating non-deployable Soldiers and compensating the wounded and injured.

It boils down to Leaders doing the right thing and insuring the sick get well or get out.

Remember, the Army is not a guaranteed job for 20+ years and it's not welfare on direct deposit. Every non-deployable Soldier has a responsibility to get quickly back in to fighting shape. If they cannot, then we cannot afford to keep them.

If I worked at a civilian corporation, say Ford Motor company, and I was disabled such that I couldn't perform my duties, there is no question, I would lose my job. If it was a job related injury, I would be compensated.

Soldiers who think they should be allowed to stay in the Army, but can't deploy are not ENTITLED to permanent employment.

What say you?

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2014 8:06 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 05 May 2014 08:06:28 -0400

All I can say is WOW! So the army has a thing in place called a profile. A P2 profile means the Soldier is limited to what he can do on his APFT, but still meets the requirements to deploy. A Soldier with a temporary P3 usually means he is non deployable and awaiting surgery. If surgery doesn't fix the problem they are usually medically retired with a percentage of disability. I don't think I can recall a P2 who couldn't deploy or a P3 that surgery couldn't fix not get a MEB. I guess the next topic for discussion will be that anyone not able to take all three events on the APFT should go through the WTU and processed out of the Army even if they can deploy. I think Soldiers that have sacrificed on deployments with over 15 years should be allowed to do their 20 and retire if they sustain injuries whether while deployed or back in garrison. Of course those that don't want deploy and find ways out of it are usually chapters and are processed. Of not they are usually awaiting surgery or even in some cases have a family issue like a wife with cancer that no one in the unit knows about but those that need to.

Response by SFC Jeffrey Wade made May 5 at 2014 9:23 AM

SFC Jeffrey Wade — Mon, 05 May 2014 09:23:05 -0400

I disagree with this for the reason of my experiences. I have deployed 8 times, all of them voluntary, I would PCS to a unit that was short personnel to deploy with them. Blown up in Iraq in 2004 by an IED, and still did 3 more deployments after that. In 2010 I was made non-deployable due to injuries I suffered from in 2004 (bone sticking into my spinal cord, over the years and more deployments was making nerve damage worse). I didn't get help because I didn't want to be made non-deployable, end result is that by not seeking help I now have permanent nerve damage and other problems.

When I was made non-deployable and med-board paperwork was started on me, half the soldiers in my unit looked at me like I was a worthless, they just saw the permanent profile and couldn't deploy. Who cares how many times I was over there. The other half saw past the profile and saw the experience I held. Hardest part of it all was seeing my unit deploy and having to stay back with them. Best part of it, them coming back and being thanked for the training I was able to give them, being told what I showed and taught them was a big help and did make a difference over there.

end result, I appealed my medboard, stayed in to retire and continued to help those willing to be helped, not those with a closed mind that could only see the non-deployable status. There is a saying, cant judge a book by its cover, you sometimes need to look inside and read that book and may learn something.

is someone worthless who is non-deployable, yes if you look at a profile paper. Some of them though have a wealth of knowledge to share, if someone looks past that profile paper.

Response by SSgt Gregory Guina made May 5 at 2014 10:52 AM

SSgt Gregory Guina — Mon, 05 May 2014 10:52:06 -0400

SFC Definitely going to have to dosagree with you on this. There ar emany reasons why a person could be non-deployable. Think of the SM that get injured in combat and is now non-deployable. Or if I go out and break my leg or destroy a knee or shouder I am going to be non-deployable for a period of time especially if I require surgery to fully recover. This can leave someone non-deployable for a year or more but they are able to recover and get back in the fight.

Also there are many positions in the military that are required to be filled but the unit is non-deployable. training commands and depot level maintenance facilities are two exzmples as well as base units. It is possible for a person to work in one of these areas or units and suport the warfighter. By sticking them in a non-deployable unit you can free up an able bodied individuals for deployments.

Response by SFC Gary Fox made May 5 at 2014 11:59 AM

SFC Gary Fox — Mon, 05 May 2014 11:59:15 -0400

Has anyone ever heard of CPT Scotty Smiley? In 2005, he was wounded in Iraq and lost his eyesight. He is the Army's first legally blind active duty officer. A medical review board found him both physically and mentally fit to continue serving on active duty.

Despite his blindness, he earned a Master of Business Administration from Duke University's Fuqua School of Business. A graduate of the U.S. Military Academy, he went on to teach military leadership at West Point and to command the Warrior Transition Unit at West Point's Keller Army Medical Center. He also earned the Army's prestigious MacArthur Leadership Award, which recognizes junior officers who demonstrate the ideals espoused by Gen. Douglas MacArthur: duty, honor, country.

He is now a Major and since 2012, has been serving as Assistant Professor of Military Science at Gonzaga University in Spokane, WA.

There are plenty of jobs a non-deployable SM can do that will benefit the Army and prepare those who are deployable.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2014 2:08 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 05 May 2014 14:08:07 -0400

Sfc Thomas

I have to respectfully disagree with you. I have known many leaders who were unable to deploy who taught us invaluable lessons for combat. Additionally, if you have folks who are non deployable, then that's less deployable personnel you need to leave behind.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2014 3:05 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 05 May 2014 15:05:57 -0400

SFC Thomas, I have to say that I admire your passion and commitment to the Army's mission, but to be that short sighted is quite concerning. I have deployed four times in my career. Twice as an 11B and twice as a 27D. Three of those deployments where on a P2 Profile. I went on Permanent Profile in 2005 due to injuries sustained during my first tour. I have dealt my whole career since with other saying that Soldier's on Permanent Profile where useless or wouldn't make good leaders. I seriously disagree with that. If anyone told me that I was less of a Leader or less of a Soldier simply because I was on Permanent Profile I would punch them in the throat.

I fully agree that deploying in support of the Army's mission is one of the most important things that a Soldier can do and you're right, it is main purpose behind being a Soldier. However, just because a Soldier is non-deployable that doesn't make them useless. There are certainly those among our ranks that actively try to not deploy and those are the Soldiers that should be barred from reenlistment, but there are other contributing factors that have to be taken into consideration. To simply say that if you haven't deployed or non-deployable that you should not be promoted or afforded other opportunities is a pretty toxic frame of mind.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2014 6:39 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 05 May 2014 18:39:28 -0400

That's one of the most asinine concepts I have ever heard. Soldiers are injured on a regular basis both through deployment related injuries and training related injuries. Neither of these make them less valuable as soldier or leaders.

Response by 1SG Shawn Herzog made May 5 at 2014 6:56 PM

1SG Shawn Herzog — Mon, 05 May 2014 18:56:55 -0400

SFC Thomas, IMHO, you are not only WRONG! but extremely unprofessional as a SFC. You obviously see things one-sided and have a very lack of open mindedness. I for one have deployed seven times and have more time in a combat zone (IN TRUE COMBAT) than many of our young Soldiers, NCO's and Officer's have in the Army. I am now unfortunately a little physically injured making me not deployable at this time. Now according to you, I am useless in this Army. While I can agree to the point that every Soldier should be deployable, there are and needs to be certain exceptions for those wounded warriors injured in combat at least. I am currently working at a senior staff level and bring quite a lot to the table to share with other professionals. I am a MSG with 21 years and am soon to be heading out to retire to allow a younger, more fit SFC to replace me, though that is despite your inaccurate comment above.
JMHO....

Response by 1SG Shawn Herzog made May 5 at 2014 7:13 PM

1SG Shawn Herzog — Mon, 05 May 2014 19:13:44 -0400

On top of it all, you ONLY deployed ONCE during over 13 years of combat?!?!?!? AND that was to Iraq in 2009-2010 when there were slim to NO HOSTILITIES?!?!??!?! WOW What a JOKE!!! LMAO!!!

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2014 10:05 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 05 May 2014 22:05:03 -0400

In the Corps, if you're not taking your PFT, CFT for medical reasons that also means you won't be going to any PME, which means the chances of you getting promoted is slim to none. Now lets say you are the greatest leader in the world (not likely with all those thumbs downs you're getting) and if you had a bunch of experience under your belt from deployments and training. You become non deployable because you get in a bad accident or injured on deployment, are you telling me that you wouldn't be able to provide that experience, guidance, and training to your men because of your current disabilities? Ive known many men who were permanently or temporarily disabled from injuries sustained in combat and were valuable in maintaining the readiness of their Marines. Just because you are non-deployable doesn't make you worthless. I don't find it entertaining that you think an "lol" is acceptable when speaking about those who are unable to do the norm due to injuries that make people non-deployable. You're a SFC right? Get real!

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2014 1:59 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 May 2014 01:59:41 -0400

I want to say that I do understand the intent, but the proposed solution is flawed.

I've made comments in other portions of this thread, but I haven't seen the other side of the argument considered.

So the original statement is that "if you are non-deployable, [the Army should send you] to the house," i.e. kick you out, and the example given involves physical capabilities or the lack thereof. I hope that's a fair assessment. So, taking that one step further, all Soldiers fill positions, and if Soldiers deploy, then positions should be deployable positions. But not all positions are deployable.

So, if a Soldier is deployable, but a position is not, then is not an injustice is being done to both the Soldier who is capable of deploying and wants to deploy, as well as to the military by keeping a deployable Soldier in a non-deployable slot? (There are non-deployable positions and non-deployable units that are filled by deployable Soldiers out of choice and necessity, my "devil's argument" is not to belittle them. If you read my other posts, you'll get the big picture.) If you take all the non-deployable Soldiers and kick them out, then are you not left with an Army made up entirely of deployable Soldiers? I believe it is inefficient and wrong to remove an otherwise valuable asset from the military just because they cannot deploy, and lose the knowledge, experience, and leadership that Soldier may have (case-by-case basis, maybe)? Why can't that Soldier train other Soldiers? Training still has to occur in the rear to send more Soldiers forward. Support ops have to take place. For goodness' sakes... we all want to get paid, don't we? Does finance have to be deployable? My check comes from Ft. McCoy.

If anything needs to be kicked out of the Army, it's blanket statements that don't take into considerations the various factors that are influenced if that good idea fairy were to become policy.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2014 2:15 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 May 2014 02:15:09 -0400

This is a very important issue but it should not be treated with a 'black or white' solution. Every case must be treated on its own merit. Their non-deployability does not prevent them from functioning in other areas. Yes the Army is all about training and implementing what we do in training on the battle field. If they cannot deploy to be in theater but still able to perform on their daily individual tasks, it goes to support the efforts of those on the front lines; that is what they called 'The War Effort' during World War II. It is the totality of various individuals doing their respective bits to ensure victory for all. They may not be deployable but if they are efficient in what they do...or what they get assigned to do, their efforts must be recognized. I have deployed two times and I can say there were some that were deployable but were not efficient in anything and were still able to pass the board and got promoted...Memorizing and spewing the memorized stuff...meanwhile, the colleague at the rear...the non-deployable was doing marvelously at his duties and got promoted. If you asked me, I would say the non-deploable fellow earned his rank. He worked for it. Some of the non-deployable statuses are of no fault of those SMs. It is just the way it is. Non-deployable status SHOULD not prevent anyone from being promoted, provided they meet all other requirements and earn their rank on merit. That's my take on this.

Response by SSG Curt Pangracs made May 6 at 2014 8:16 AM

SSG Curt Pangracs — Tue, 06 May 2014 08:16:02 -0400

You want to talk about downsizing? How about kicking-out NCO's who can't spell? How about not promoting someone who can't communicate clearly and effectively? I would rather work for someone who can't deploy than someone who is basically illiterate.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2014 11:25 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 May 2014 11:25:55 -0400

Because a person is medically non deployable, they should be able to hold leadership positions and be promoted. There is one thing you have to understand the Army is not going to separate you just because you are medically non deployable. I knew a Soldier who had a pace maker, guess what he was fit for duty and was able to continue on. Sometimes bad things happens to good Soldiers. The ones that need to go are the ones ducking and dodging deployment. They are screwing their fellow Soldier.

Response by SSG Jim Handy made May 6 at 2014 11:40 AM

SSG Jim Handy — Tue, 06 May 2014 11:40:52 -0400

This cannot be a blanket policy that covers everyone. It has to be dealt with on a case by case basis. Most soldiers don't become non-deployable on purpose. If something happened to them while serving that MADE them non-deployable they deserve other options. If they are good soldiers with good records, there are jobs they can be re-trained in where they can still serve without deploying, and they deserve that option. If you are willing to kick one of your brothers or sisters to the curb because they became damaged while serving their country, YOU don't understand what it is to be a soldier and YOU are probably the one that needs to go. The military is a very large and complicated machine with many parts, and not ALL of those parts need to actually be in a combat zone!

Response by 1LT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2014 3:17 PM

1LT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 06 May 2014 15:17:30 -0400

SFC Thomas, I can see your point and respect your position, but I'd have to disagree with this as a blanket statement. MND covers a broad range of issues, but none of them make a Soldier any less of a Soldier. The only exception I would make to this is if someone intentionally sought out MND status in order to avoid deployment. However, assuming that we are talking about those who were wounded or had a medical condition through no fault of their own, I will proceed...

First, consider the difference between someone being medically non-deployable and medically non-able to train. If you develop type II diabetes, sleep apnea, or even a benign tumor, by regulation you should be considered MND. However, you can hardly argue that an E-7 with 15+ years of experience who develops diabetes and has to take an insulin shot several times a day is not qualified to pass on their knowledge and experience.

Developing and mentoring your subordinates to be Soldiers and leaders of character and sound morals may be the most important task of a leader, second only to care of those under you. These are things you can't learn from a TM, an AR, or any other form of training. Not only this, but there are soooo many stateside administrative positions meant for senior NCO's that are crucial to service support and combat service support in the Army. Are we to tell an MND E-6 who just might be the most skilled and qualified person in the Army at their job that they cannot take that E-8 spot at Division because MND disqualifies them from gaining their second rocker?

Your argument is that an MND soldier should not be promotable simple because they cannot follow their troops into battle, but leading isn't always in the moment and from the front. An NCO or officer who strives to develop and train their subordinates in the States is more of a leader than the one who half-asses both and continues to do so in theatre.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2014 7:37 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 08 May 2014 07:37:40 -0400

Not trying to stir the pot too much more here, but according to your profile, you deployed once from 2009-2010. Why do you think that validity of service is directly correlated to downrange time if you've only been able to manage one year of deployment time since 1995?

Response by SFC Jeffrey Wade made May 9 at 2014 11:59 AM

SFC Jeffrey Wade — Fri, 09 May 2014 11:59:53 -0400

why stop at booting out the people who are non-deployable? how about those with low PT scores? they obviously aren't pulling their own weight and will only slow a unit down when deployed to war. Anyone who gets UCMJ action against them should be booted as well, obviously they lack discipline and have no place in the Military. Anyone who fails a NCOES school should be shown the door too, if they cant pass the schools they don't deserve to be in, show them the door as well. Anyone late to a formation, get them out! If your late in a warzone someone could be dead from it, get them out of the ARMY! (this was written with great sarcasm)

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2014 4:37 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 10 May 2014 04:37:58 -0400

Have you even been in combat? I don't mean deployed to a combat zone. Have you ever seen combat. I know a few non deployable guys that have combat or training injuries that will follow them for the rest of their lives. Is that how we want to treat our comrades? They have issues that were caused from military service so we will punish them by not promoting them. I'm pretty sure drill sgts aren't being deployed while they wear the hat and badge. They are training Soldiers to goto war. They clearly do a pretty good job. I completely disagree with you. If they are fat and it's not because of a medical issue then they should not be promoted. If they can't pass their pt test and don't have a medical reason then they should not be promoted.

Response by SGT Montana Crawford made May 21 at 2014 8:58 PM

SGT Montana Crawford — Wed, 21 May 2014 20:58:23 -0400

I'm assuming you mean soldiers outside of a standard "nondeployable unit".

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 22 at 2014 10:31 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 May 2014 10:31:59 -0400

SFC Thomas,

I'm surprised at your closed mindedness on this topic. I've never been non-deployable, but I like to think that if I got injured and needed surgery and got a profile that you, as my battle buddy, would have my back, should I not be a leader if I need ankle surgery? Should I just hang my head in shame and grind my career to a halt? No career advancement? Get removed from my unit because I'm unfit to lead soldiers? Forget retirement and just ask for a Med board? I feel like your playing a little bit of a devils advocate here. I can't believe that you would let a battle fall like that. If you would, I'm glad your not a battle that works with me.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 22 at 2014 11:17 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 May 2014 11:17:29 -0400

SFC Thomas, my interest peaked when I saw the "lol" after the SFC who was non-deployable and couldnt wear a vest. My question(s) are these: 1. Was the training she provided somehow diminished by her non-deployable status? 2. Did it make the information less relevant? 3. Would the information not contribute to the units overall mission success?

And this quote of yours, "Why are you training us on anything and will not be there when it matters the most?" Would her training not save lives and aid you in doing the same?

I retire (not medical retirement) in 2 months and after a 20 year career I am now non-deployable due to my injuries I have received throughout the years. I have been on numerous deployements to Afghanistan and Iraq, I currently work in the realm of antiterrorism and force protection. Due to my non-deployability does that make any training I provide to my units soldiers who are going overseas invalid and any less relevant?

I suggest to you that it does not, I have valuable information and experiences that can be passed on to soldiers heading into the operational environment, that will increase their chances at survivability.

Yes some people ride profiles and become non deployable to avoid service in a hostile area(s) but to say that all are incapable of providing value to our Army is extremely shallow and lacks foresight. You, one day may be non deployable, it doesnt mean you can not contribute to the fight!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 26 at 2014 3:52 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 May 2014 15:52:10 -0400

SFC Thomas,

I really hope you have a specific group in mind, like legitimate malingerers. Because some folks actually go through MEBs and take P3 profiles in order to continue contributing to this great nation, not to mention WTU Soldiers.

I have a permanent profile for my right knee; it imploded during a run, got cadaver replacement. I've deployed four times, most recently OEF in 2012 attached to a recon scout platoon. However, since I have a P2 profile, I can never be a Drill Sergeant, which I consider my dream job. Does that make me a bad NCO, that although I can deploy I'm not good enough create the Army's future junior ranks?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2014 9:04 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 31 May 2014 21:04:58 -0400

I can understand your reasoning SFC Thomas and I respect your opinion, but I have to respectfully disagree with your opinion in regards to starting a chapter packet for non deployable SM.

Its true that being a soldier and deploying go hand in hand, but if the SM or Leader was proficient in their MOS it would be a waste to get rid of this soldier who has the skills necessary to help develop the soldiers appointed under them into leaders and teachers themselves.

As for promoting these non-deployable SM its fair to have that shortcoming taken into account when considering promotion.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 1:05 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:05:39 -0400

I couldn't agree more. If you can't deploy you are of no use to the military.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 3:32 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:32:28 -0400

This idea of non-deployable, non-promotable, or flagged, is assisted by the ERB. But, Soldiers who have issues that cause them to be unable to go on deployment may stem from troubled units, and issues beyond the uniform. There may be instances of 'skipping' or 'ducking', but they are so rare that it makes me laugh. I've seen a former General's daughter deploy twice, and other Soldiers disappointed that they did not make the battle roster. Just because a Soldier may have a 'slick sleeve' does not equate a problem Soldier.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2014 3:49 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 24 Jul 2014 15:49:30 -0400

Not a good reason. Working as a former Paralegal, I have seen all sorts of issues. There are many reasons why a Soldier cannot deploy. You have to consider the reason, the length, and their work performance. For example, if a Soldier was injured jumping out a plane conducting Airborne Operations and could not deploy for 20 weeks, you would punish them? Worse, it compounds the issue and the Soldiers may no longer be motivated and cause further problems. Just because a person deploys, does not mean they are a good Soldier. A system is already set to to handle a range of issues. It's not the best, but to say no across the board dampens the overall morale.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 25 at 2014 7:18 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 19:18:56 -0400

Sarge, a status of "non-deployable" isn't a career ender, and shouldn't be. In many cases, even a 999M isn't a permanent designation.
I do agree with you on promotion, though. A non-deployable soldier should not be promoted, until his or issue is resolved.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Jul 25 at 2014 7:50 PM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Fri, 25 Jul 2014 19:50:08 -0400

Being non-deployable does not make one less of a soldier or a leader. A soldier can be non-deployable because of an injury received on one or more previous deployments. Does this make their experiences count less because they cannot currently deploy? Does this mean they can no longer be a leader - a combat leader yes, but we still need installation and other TDA staff. I think you need to take in the bigger picture to appreciate the fact that there is a role for everyone in the service, we don't forsake our own.

Response by SGT Kristin Wiley made Aug 13 at 2014 3:46 PM

SGT Kristin Wiley — Wed, 13 Aug 2014 15:46:52 -0400

SFC Thomas,

I completely understand where you are coming from. I am currently stationed in Hawaii and I have seen numerous O-5 and below, as well as E-8 and below with no deployment patches. I find it very frustrating when these individuals are made our leaders when they do not understand the true concepts behind deployments.

However, I would be hesitant to condemn non-deployable soldiers. While I am not 'blacklisted' as being non-deployable, I am suffering from a chronic multi-symptom illness from my service in Iraq. My medical condition continues to deteriorate, but our medical system will do nothing for me. They will not even send me to a MEB for retention evaluation. I do not think I should be deployable or even in the service at this point, but our messed up system allows my mistreatment to continue. Non-deployable in my experience can mean two distinctly different things 1) You are overemphasizing an injury/illness to avoid a deployment or 2) You are truly injured/ill and are getting fucked over by the Army medical system and not being process for MEB. The least amount of Army bullshit I have experienced is when I was deployed. I honestly want to deploy right now in order to get away from the bad leadership and medical mistreatment I am currently experiencing. I'd rather suffer with less bullshit deployed; then be made to suffer due to negligence in garrison.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 8 at 2014 10:48 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 08 Oct 2014 22:48:42 -0400

While I can understand how one would argue that "non-deployable" Soldiers are essentially "dead weight", let's not forget how quickly you can become non-deployable (profiles and flags can cause this easily) and postpartum Soldiers are non-deployable.

Surely, you mean to talk about those who are on permanent profiles or have other medical conditions that put them on a "permanent, non-deployable" status?

It seems you have a lot of emphasis on whether or not the individual can deploy, while ASSUMING that being non-deployable means the Soldier has no combat experience or competency.

I would have to ask you if you felt that this should mean that senior leaders who make a mistake that would normally result in a PFC being chaptered should also be chaptered (w/o retirement)?

Since you brought up personal experiences, I had a 1SG who, on the -morning- we are boarding the buses to hit the tarmac and leave for deployment, flipped his truck (due to DUI). the MSG who assumed the duties was on his first deployment ever.

Did we help the Army "downsize"? Of course not. 1SG lost his diamond and stayed in the Army (deployed with the next BN in our Bde, as a MSG).

None of this really means anything, in the long run, on how Soldiers' experiences can help units prepare for deployment. Hell, sometimes you still have deployable Soldiers on rear-D because that's where they are needed. Not deploying with your forces might suck or otherwise make you feel bad, but being on rear-D is certainly not a "bad thing."

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 9 at 2014 3:09 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 09 Oct 2014 15:09:29 -0400

In today’s Army not everybody is being sent forward to get the job done. In my MOS I am fortunate to be able to conduct my business from the rear and not always have to be sent into combat, however I am part of a team and it is rare for the entire team to have to go forward. Usually it is a strong leader in the front and a strong leader in the rear. this being said I do believe that it should be a stipulation on specific positions you can fill and units you can be assigned. I am all for the army weeding out the people that can’t cut it anymore however in my opinion physical profiles is definitely not the place to start looking to separate one from the military especially if that is where they were injured.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 7:11 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 19:11:41 -0400

I would say if you are non-deployable for reasons that the military did not somehow cause (like coming up hot on urine analysis or lautenberg amendment) then yes, you should not be promoted. However, if say you got hit by a mortar and are recovering you are non-deployable but you should be eligible for promotion. The shade or gray is those who are injured due to non-military functions. If you get hurt skiing and break leg, but you have a passing APFT within the last six months and meet all schooling requirements, etc. Then what?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 7:55 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 19:55:51 -0400

SFC,
Not every unit in the Army are deployable!
However, they do importent job as well....so, is that case, should we not be promoted ? Or be chaptered out?

Response by SPC(P) Jay Heenan made Oct 19 at 2014 8:23 PM

SPC(P) Jay Heenan — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 20:23:00 -0400

I have had many leaders like you SFC Thomas. I certainly respect your opinion regarding this matter, I only hope that you don't ever fall into the category you are putting physically disabled Soldiers in...it is a bad place. I am judged everyday because of my physical limitations. My job still gets done and done to my high standards. I ensure my Soldier achieves this same standard. I do not think that having physical limitations means I shouldn't be able to get promoted and lead Soldiers, but there are senior leaders, like you, who think this and therefore make it impossible for some to get promoted. It is kind of refreshing to hear a senior leader say this, because I have been saying there are senior leaders who discriminate against Soldiers with physical limitations.

Response by SPC Daniel Edwards made Oct 19 at 2014 9:23 PM

SPC Daniel Edwards — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:23:07 -0400

With you on this. If you cannot fit in your gear, can't be trained, and can't do your job, then you are wasting a valuable space that could be taken by someone who is trying to make a career out of this. Anyone who is just bullshitting around needs to just get out. This is a very honorable job that should be respected and not freeloaded. Yeah, we have some perks like college, but that should not be the only reason a fatass (as you described, SFC) would want to stay in.

But I also know that some jobs are not deployable, mine in particular. Some units stay back while others go overseas.

Response by PO2 Rocky Kleeger made Oct 19 at 2014 9:29 PM

PO2 Rocky Kleeger — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:29:20 -0400

I concur

Response by CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2014 9:39 PM

CPL(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 19 Oct 2014 21:39:10 -0400

Would you want me to train you & your troops? Here's my run down; Airborne, Air Assault. Rams Head Device, CIB, Anti armor, explosives, sniper, cls, early warnng and traps, nbc nco, mechanic, 2 year stint as a drill sgt, light infantry, medium infantry, heavy infantry. My unit deployed ft dix decided I needed to put out because of military caused hearing loss my chain of command fought with dix for 3 weeks to take me with them. Dix keboshed that one, the day I left them for home my chain of command did a pass & review on me should I mention that I was a pfc at the time (8 year break in service) this was in 2010. On rear det. I did 6 COC inventories went through 3 CO's had a 1sgt. that sent me to a MMRB with no paperwork or NCO accompaniment. I received no awards no schools no promotions even though I was doing the job of the motor sgt. that's a SFC position isn't it. I also received no drill pay for 9 months and had to pay back the 3 months of active predeployment pay twice. All while my troops where over there without me. Are there profile pogues, you bet there is. The NCO's in charge of them are responsible for getting them out. It took the one's in charge of MAR2 decisions until roughly May 2014 to decide I am retainable and deployable, are there SM's who are non deployable who are worth retaining you bet their is. I've had SFC's work with me and tell me I should outrank them, I go to schools and training courses the instructors task me out as assistant instructor for the class. What I'm getting at is some bad experiences with non deploables does not mean they are the standard usually they are the exception, "the bad apple in the barrel if you will. I hope I have enlighted you and maybe made you think a little bit yes you are entitled to your opinion but that opinion should be with all the facts and circumstances in front of you for an informed decision. God speed on your journey SFC Demond.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 8 at 2014 2:02 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 08 Dec 2014 14:02:27 -0500

So SFC Thomas I should be sent home because I'm not deployable because I tore my ACL and meniscus in Afghanistan earlier this year? Had two surgeries to fix my knee and won't be deployable until next year sometime due to recovery time.

There are plenty examples of good soldiers who are not deployable, and plenty of bad soldiers who are. With all due respect SFC your premise needs some thinking through.

Response by PO2 Corey Ferretti made Dec 8 at 2014 4:53 PM

PO2 Corey Ferretti — Mon, 08 Dec 2014 16:53:53 -0500

SFC Private RallyPoint Member Well i read through a lot of the responses and your post. And all i have to say is your comments are that of an E7 not that as a SFC. You had a valid point then but the way you have it worded is that if you cant deploy you are useless and need to out process. If this is still your mind set i hope you do not make it any farther up the ranks. you have such a narrow point of view. I pray that you never get so injured you are non-deployable because then you meet your out demise based on what you wrote above. I have worked for someone like you and my time there sucked because if your narrow minded here where else are you narrow minded. This mentality will hurt a troop more because when they do get injured they wont get help for fear of being told they need to leave service. You should think of the backlash this could have on the Services.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Dec 10 at 2014 4:38 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Wed, 10 Dec 2014 16:38:59 -0500

I knew a soldier who has a beautiful family. His wife was struck with a disease that required constant care. She can' even stay in her wheelchair for long periods of time. They sold everything, their life is miserable and he loves his wife more than ever. He is non-deployable. Would you like his phone number?

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 10 at 2014 5:25 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Dec 2014 17:25:01 -0500

Just as your comment about people on a profile, I think you are painting with a broad brush. There are plenty of units that don't require someone to deploy to be effective. Is the guy pulling security at home base less valuable than the guy pulling security at a deployed location? Is the cyber operations guy, hacking an enemy network from the states, worth less than an infantry guy in country? Is the guy left in charge of the rear echelon a less capable leader because he has to take care of all the families left behind, in addition to any soldiers left behind, and whatever tasks higher headquarters has, instead of being in a firefight?

Would you further break your assessment down into "deployed directly into a firefight", "deployed to a FOB", or "deployed to a forward location, but not to the country itself (such as the gulf area, attached to the Combined Air Operations Center, manning the Patriot batteries, or training our Arab allies)"?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 10 at 2014 11:24 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 10 Dec 2014 23:24:05 -0500

I totally disagree I was non-deployable at one point for something that was beyond my control (a heart condition) but I stayed in kept working with my provider to get downgraded and I deployed last year and have been home a little over two months... I feel like your post is a bit insensitive, and it's the army's choice whether those soldiers are fit to stay in or not. Not ours so I think none of us should pass judgement, because if they are still in, in a non-deployable status someone above them made that call. It's a process to be able to stay in and be non-deployable and its not fair to say they should be held back in the career because of that, in some instances their no -deployable status is due to their service ...

Response by MSG Scott McBride made Dec 11 at 2014 12:24 AM

MSG Scott McBride — Thu, 11 Dec 2014 00:24:35 -0500

Agreed with some of what you say; I am a retired MSG with countless deployments and FTXs in the duffle. Nothing pissed me off more than a Soldier who could not deploy for one reason or another. However, we have Soldiers, great Soldiers, who cannot deploy for serious health reasons...such as chrones...in my opinion, those Soldiers who are nondeployable but are motivated and continue to make our Army better, then they can serve us in other capacities. Those who are just "riding it out" need to be put out. Army Strong!

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 11 at 2014 1:35 AM

CPL Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 11 Dec 2014 01:35:43 -0500

I totally disagree with your whole paragraph. My husband and I are both active duty 92Gs (cooks). I have been in the army longer than my husband and due to standing on his feet for long periods of times, working six days out of a week, no three days, no four days, no company get together's, no holidays have made my husband's arches fall. My husband is no longer deployable but not once have I made him feel less of a man because he can not do certain simple tasks such as running after his son, playing football or basketball. My husband knows that his military career is almost at a crossroad and at the end of the day he still have figure out how he's going to provide for our family. In my eyes I don't feel the Army should just start a chapter packet and send him home because he's still a good leader that constantly helps SM out in their time in need even though he can not help them on the battlefield he still helps them in their garrison life.

Also, when you said that "the SFC couldn't even wear her vest lol". That was just plain ole mean. You try being a female in the army constantly worrying about water weight, baby weight and so forth. I also used to work for a SGT who due to pregnancy had to get a C-section, two breast reductions and other surgeries from being just a female. That SFC could be going through some serious medical problems to were she can't lose weight and you think its funny. Not cool at all.

Response by CSM Michael Chavaree made Oct 11 at 2015 2:53 PM

CSM Michael Chavaree — Sun, 11 Oct 2015 14:53:21 -0400

After I was shot twice in combat I was "non-deployable" until I got back on my legs... Went on to selections and units you couldnt/didnt do with non injured legs.. Then went on to excel in every duty position, and advance in grade at a faster pace than you, am I the guy they should have kicked out of the Army?

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 21 at 2015 1:01 AM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 21 Oct 2015 01:01:12 -0400

I agree, but some won't hear you SFC. The military is a buisness and if you can't be used then you should be transitioned out. I say transitioned because saying chaptered is a little harsh to some sensitive ears and it's more so saying hey thanks for your service rather than saying goodbye Im finished using you.

Response by MSG Alfred Aguilar made Oct 21 at 2015 1:49 AM

MSG Alfred Aguilar — Wed, 21 Oct 2015 01:49:44 -0400

It would appear SFC, that you have opened a can of worms...

Response by SSG Stacy Edgin made Nov 20 at 2015 3:19 PM

SSG Stacy Edgin — Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:19:30 -0500

I think that would be correct. If you cannot deploy, you cannot perform your wartime mission. If you cannot perform your wartime mission. Time to move on to other career options

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 20 at 2015 6:42 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 20 Nov 2015 18:42:53 -0500

Seems like SMA agrees with me and thinks it's the number 1 problem in the Army lol

Response by LTC Bink Romanick made Nov 23 at 2015 6:02 PM

LTC Bink Romanick — Mon, 23 Nov 2015 18:02:57 -0500

SFC Private RallyPoint Member I know of an NCO was ND due to weight prior to ODS. When his unit was deployed he said "I'm ND" they told him get ready to deploy that weight control was a peacetime requirement and he deployed and was subsequently promoted to SSG.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 23 at 2015 6:05 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 23 Nov 2015 18:05:44 -0500

Nothing gets people fired up in the Army more than PT and profiles.

Response by SSG Ronald Rollins made Nov 24 at 2015 7:11 PM

SSG Ronald Rollins — Tue, 24 Nov 2015 19:11:07 -0500

If the soldier is caught faking an injury that keeps them from deploying then action needs to be taken. If they are non-deployable thru something that is not their fault, then you cannot blame the soldier. If they are doing a great job then let them continue to do it. Why kick them out? If they are trying to better themself that is all the better. I have worked with non deployable soldiers especially seniors. Some had medical problems due to military service. One had a heart problem. But he did a gret job training soldiers and getting them ready to join the unit downrange. Not all soldiers are shammers. They have real problems and kicking them out is not only wrong but unfair to those who are really trying. I had to get medivaced out on my last tour of Iraq. I wound up being non deployable, I became a Instructor at the MP school. I still made a difference and helped train future soldiers.

Response by SGT Forrest Perez made Nov 26 at 2015 1:08 PM

SGT Forrest Perez — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:08:14 -0500

I agree why follow and "learn" from them if they can never go overseas with you. Unless I had to learn how to ride a soft shoe profile

Response by SPC Bryan Guzman-Piedra made Nov 26 at 2015 1:09 PM

SPC Bryan Guzman-Piedra — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:09:39 -0500

While I don't think Non-deployable soldiers should necessarily be in the army, what you are suggesting is punishing people for what amounts to being injured. That's not cool, it makes me wonder how you would treat an injured soldier in your formation.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 1:37 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:37:12 -0500

That's too black and white for be a policy. Concept makes a little sense but definitely not practical. I am currently non deployable for the first time in 17 years and 5 deployments for the next 60 days for my hearing H3 profile, I definitely don't think I should be chaptered.

Response by SSG Bruce Zeit made Nov 26 at 2015 1:46 PM

SSG Bruce Zeit — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:46:42 -0500

I was medically discharged because I was non deployable. I can see both sides of this coin, I was a career NCO and wanted to finish my time in uniform. Yes, I was deemed medically non deployable but why get rid of a soldier who wanted to serve and was capable of training and helping junior soldiers ?
I spent the bulk of my career in the Engineer Regiments and was given the option to recalls or get out I declassed and was still put out. I worked hard to train my soldiers and foster the values we all should hold close, instead of being allowed to stay and continue I was boarded and sent packing. Some of my junior soldiers were left with poor leadership filling my slot. I knew I wouldn't deploy but wanted my troops to know they were trained and prepared to my fullest ability.

Response by SP5 Roberta Sanchez made Nov 26 at 2015 1:47 PM

SP5 Roberta Sanchez — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:47:22 -0500

No promotions if non-deployable? It depends on why they are non-deployable. If a person has an injury, it is a lot different than someone who is a Beetle Baily. It is not fair to penalize a combat veteran or someone who carries an injury in the performance of their duties because they can no longer deploy. There is no place in combat for an injured person, but it sure cause a lot of people to be injured.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Nov 26 at 2015 1:59 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 13:59:45 -0500

I do agree with you in most cases. It is part of the Soldier's creed and I do think every Soldier should be ready to deploy when called upon. I also think there has to be some judgement in place and the first question I would ask is why is the Soldier non-deployable. If it is medical reasons, what is going on with the review process (MEB/MRB). The Army does have processes to medically retire those who are injured in the line of duty and cannot do their job anymore. That being said, it costs the Army a lot of money to train a person and I think it is fair to see if the Army can use that person and his/her experiences somewhere else in the institutional Army. If the Soldier is a leader in a deployable unit, I think the Army should transfer them out. IMHO, it would be hard to be an effective leader if one cannot lead Soldiers on their wartime mission. However, their limitations may not restrict someone from being an outstanding trainer, administrator, logistician, etc. I think we will see non-deployable status become a discriminator in promotions with the SMA wanting that to become a check box on an NCOER. I do support deployable status having an impact on promotions and even if the Army lets someone continue to serve, I think it is hard to justify a promotion for them over someone who can deploy.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 2:21 PM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 14:21:13 -0500

I think the SFC is talking about people who've been in 15 plus years never deployed, can't wear there vest because of this or that. Those are the same people who go to training thinking they know everything and that gets on my nerve. I've been in 7 years did 1 real deployment to Afghanistan and a second "deployment" to Kuwait now I have under my belt as a SPC, will probably end up with 5 deployments total, how can I take a SFC or a MSG seriously if they've never deployed or are non-deployable. How can you even make it that far in your career without one deployment.

Response by PO2 Jesse Hutton made Nov 26 at 2015 3:27 PM

PO2 Jesse Hutton — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 15:27:59 -0500

I think everyone should have to deploy but there are reasonable exceptions. Look at Gregory D. Gadson. he lost both legs in the service. He didn't want to leave the service and he stayed in after the injury. Situations like that, I am OK with someone being non deployable. However if they are non deployable because they don't want to be away from their family or other reason similar, then I don't agree with it. I am a Navy vet. I did two deployments. I was in the gulf during the Iraq/Iran war and then Desert Storm. I had to be away from my family during that time and short cruises as well. I was lucky that my ship is in port when my wife went in labor on both my kids, so I got to see them born. However there are many sailors, grunts, soldiers airmen that wasn't as lucky as me. Those positions should be available for those that have been deployed to give them a break in order to spend time with their family. I don't know how the Army works but sailors do a tour at sea and then a tour on shore duty. I imagine the Army is the same. They are up for orders every so many years. The only other ones I think should be able to get a nondeployable orders would be for situations like Gregory D. Gadson.

Response by PO1 Rodney Bracey made Nov 26 at 2015 3:28 PM

PO1 Rodney Bracey — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 15:28:20 -0500

I have served with plenty of non deployable personnel. Their professionalism is a non issue. In fact, most non deployables often work harder because they know they may take one on the chin during fitrep/eval periods for not deploying.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 3:40 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 15:40:56 -0500

IMO, if you can't deploy, you should be separated. Get out, get the treatment you need, etc. RCP is a waste of $. Why let a Soldier stay in that's non dep? Then not promote them? They'll be allowed to stay in, prolonging the inevitable. This isn't to say non deployable Soldiers aren't good leaders, etc. Our job is to be deployable. If you cant, then you need to get out, get the help you need, and get a job that doesn't require you to deploy. Respectfully.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 3:41 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 15:41:05 -0500

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 3:45 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 15:45:15 -0500

I think all of you are being sensitive. #allopinionsmatter lol. Just because one person's opinion doesn't parallel yours doesn't mean that they're unprofessional, just like your opinion of said person making an opinion makes you more professional. I myself (an infantryman) have been deployed 5 times to real combat between Iraq and Afghanistan. That doesn't make me less experienced than someone who has 7 or more experienced than someone who has less than me. There are plenty of MSG's and SGM/CSM's that have not deployed once I there 25+ year career but still have more experience than I do as a SFC with 18+ years. There are are plenty of people with "real combat" deployments that have no experience whatsoever. That's just how it is. I think the key is to identify those who aren't deployable, find out why, then if their issue is valid put them in positions where they can still serve honorably. JMHO

Response by Sgt Kevin Curl made Nov 26 at 2015 3:45 PM

Sgt Kevin Curl — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 15:45:25 -0500

I agree , if this was the norm there are plenty of military personal missing limbs that would still like to serve and can't . It's one thing if it's not in your MOS but shouldn't be taking up a billet if you can't perform !

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 4:20 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 16:20:05 -0500

You are obviously uneducated on the bigger picture of how the Army operates. It takes all kinds of Soldiers behind the scenes that keep the warfighter functioning on and off the battlefield. I have deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan and now work at a Staff position in Corps facilitating the war fighters who are heading down range. Because I am unable to deploy again because of medical reasons this makes me a sub par soldier in your eyes. It is idiots like you that give the Army a bad name. How can you take care of soldiers with a view point like that? I wonder how someone like you ever became an NCO in the first place.

Response by SGT Sean Whitenton made Nov 26 at 2015 5:16 PM

SGT Sean Whitenton — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 17:16:51 -0500

I think it depends on the reason they aren't deployable; I don't think anyone is going to begrudge the guy who got wounded in action taking a billet back home. The ones that grate are the ones that seem to be working the system to avoid going overseas. I'm guessing that this is harder to do on active duty than in the guard/reserves, but when I was at Hood 07-08 time frame, there were a lot of instructors who had been there for years without deploying. Some of whom definitely were not professional NCOs.

Response by MSG Kirt Highberger made Nov 26 at 2015 5:41 PM

MSG Kirt Highberger — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 17:41:10 -0500

Whatever condition results in a nondeployable status should also result in a FLAG of all favorable actions. If this condition is permanent. It should result in a med board action for retention, reclassification etc

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 5:53 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 17:53:24 -0500

I once had a Plt Sgt who told me to never pass up a good opportunity to shut the fuck up and really think about how you want to express your thoughts...

Was good advice

Response by Cpl Rc Layne made Nov 26 at 2015 6:12 PM

Cpl Rc Layne — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 18:12:58 -0500

It would have to be a case by case basis. Combat injuries would be one thing, but somebody manipulating the system for their personal benefit is something else.

Response by SSG Ralph Watkins made Nov 26 at 2015 7:54 PM

SSG Ralph Watkins — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 19:54:07 -0500

It used to be that if you were non-deployable this was always the case. When you status changed, you were allowed back on the promotion list. I left the active Army in 92 & went in the Guard. We had a guy who weaseled his way out deploying saying he had asthma as a kid. He didn't come with us & it ticked off everybody that he got promoted. When our CG found out about all of the shenanigans, he busted him back down & made sure to get deserving, deployed people their promotions. I am sorry, but it's like training for the Olympics & not being able to participate. Being deployable is what the expectation of your job is. Many people who got injured had their careers ruined & were forced out. That's just the risk of doing the job.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 8:11 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 20:11:34 -0500

I am in that boat right now of not being fully mission capable, and it sucks to know that my career is over. Being hurt and being looked at by leaders like yourself who would rather force out a soldier who is injured than ensure that soldier is taken care of and processed out of the military like they should be is the reason our military is going downhill. Once I get back stateside I plan on starting my med board process and get what I deserve, but as you know it takes time to get this process going and just chaptering a soldier out who deserves to be med boarded is the wrong answer.

Response by SFC Don Ward made Nov 26 at 2015 8:34 PM

SFC Don Ward — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 20:34:00 -0500

And you, Sergeant, are one of the things wrong with the Army today. How about you worry about you and making yourself a better leader, instead of ragging on those that have been there, done that, and now teach it better than you can probably even guess. But no, you want to stand on your highhorse and judge instead

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 26 at 2015 8:41 PM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 20:41:03 -0500

I think that if you are really non deployable you need to be separated. Period. When the SMA recently discussed the 50,000 Soldiers who are non deployable he included in that number many who are simply not compliant with MEDPROS. It is a constant struggle to keep people up to date simply because junior leaders aren't engaged and invested in ensuring the Soldiers they lead are medically deployable.

I believe that the only reason to have an Army is to kill people and break things. If you can't wear you gear, carry a weapon and go to the field you basically are taking up a spot from somebody who is fully mission capable.

One thing you can do is not approve leave or passes if people aren't compliant with MEDPROS.

As far as legitimately non deployable folks go, I think we have to be careful about pulling the trigger too fast on medical separations. If somebody is legitimately hurt/injured we have an obligation to see if we can fix them and return them to duty. If they aren't going to get better they need to be separated.

That's just my $.02 worth, and all I feel like jamming out on an iPad.

Response by SPC Raul Santiago made Nov 26 at 2015 9:41 PM

SPC Raul Santiago — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 21:41:51 -0500

That makes no sense!! My question to you is would you rather have a person back in the rear that knows there stuff and train soldiers up to par or have or deploy everyone leaving no one to be able to train the replacement soldiers that you lose either by E.T.S' K.I.A Medical? Every know you don't take everyone. In every situation be it in the movies or in real life you leave some one back either to train or to be able to supply the unit that is deployed and if it is a non deployable person it is better because that person knows what is expected and yes very valuable to the unit in so many way. Promotion yes!!! Now if that person is non deployable and a total f--k up and is not of any value no!!

Response by SPC Raul Santiago made Nov 26 at 2015 10:01 PM

SPC Raul Santiago — Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:01:02 -0500

I understand what your saying but everyone is not the same. There was a General of the Third Army that thought the same way you did. He even slap a couple of soldiers around not because they were physically hurt but mentally they could not take it. Great General and I really mean that but not everyone saw his point of view and it hurt his career and him too.

Response by SSG Jeremy Kohlwes made Nov 27 at 2015 1:12 AM

SSG Jeremy Kohlwes — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 01:12:48 -0500

There are a lot of good soldiers that want to keep serving, such as people who have gone COAD after an injury that would have retired them. This is an issue that would be unique to each individual.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2015 12:36 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 12:36:50 -0500

So for clarification if a SM has been deployed encountered injuries because they were probably doing more than twirling their thumbs they should be released? Well I guess there's a few phenomenal Commander's, SGMs, and senior NCOs I know that we have to give pink slips to now. They're just holding us all back with that darn outstanding leadership and wisdom.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2015 3:21 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 15:21:37 -0500

Some of the mindsets people have on this are mind blowing. 1st of all if any of you have to feel the need to correct someone's grammar go correct it on a Harvard forum it's petty and beneath you. 2nd if you are non-deployable as in permanently non deployable then you are a toxic leader. You are forcing everyone around you to cover your slack. And covering for those people is the reason why the army has a 1 in 8 non deployable rate

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Nov 27 at 2015 3:34 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 15:34:53 -0500

That's a tough question to answer because sometimes your not deployable due to medical reasons beyond your control and you should not be denied the opportunity to compete for advancement because of your deployable status.
I was on Limited Duty twice in my career because of TBI and both times I was told by a Chief that being on LIMDU screwed me for promotion, unofficially of course.
In my personal opinion I do think that selection boards are very biased and they have little to do with a service members actual ability to do a job at the next higher rank and more with who you know.
Yes some will say I am pissed off because I never got promoted to E-7, but I do wonder how some people got promoted over me when my service record was much better than theirs was. And yes I am talking about people I know who worked with me and I know my record was better because I had seen their records and they did not have the collateral duties or various leadership positions that I had held. But in the end it is what it is.

Response by 1SG Luis Rodriguez made Nov 27 at 2015 3:39 PM

1SG Luis Rodriguez — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 15:39:53 -0500

I see a lot of folks complaining that it's not fair to the non-deployable soldier. Guess who it is really not fair to...the guys that do deploy and end up deploying short handed because you don't get replacements for those non-deployables until MAYBE after deploying. If you are temp non-deployable you should be rear-d and probably not a priority for promotion until after. If you are permanently non-deployable..I am sorry fo' Ya' but med board and we need to make sure VA takes care of you.

Response by Sgt Sherry Taylor-Bruce made Nov 27 at 2015 4:41 PM

Sgt Sherry Taylor-Bruce — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 16:41:48 -0500

Forgive my lack of knowledge about this subject, but I was active duty during the eighties before there was a need to deploy. What exactly constitutes being Non deployable?

My husband and I were both active duty when I was in and they said both parties couldn't be eligible for TDY at the same time would that make me Non deployable because we had young children?

I speak from the experience of age, not all jobs need to be done at a forward location would that make those specialities ineligible for promotion? What if they became injured while active duty? Do we then cast them aside? Unless they are unable to work and earn a living they should be given the opportunity to reach retirement like any civilian organization. We all don't need to hump a 50 pound pack up a hill to be a valuable military asset.

Response by SSG John Caples made Nov 27 at 2015 6:05 PM

SSG John Caples — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 18:05:24 -0500

There was this Sm that when Top told us we were going to Iraq in 03 the Sm stated they did not sign up to do this, let's just say that Sm and a few more Sick Call soldier's stayed back in the rear with the gear, Had a Plt. Sgt like that couldn't wear the Vest couldn't Pt But could train us and cuss us out just because one soldier was running behind for morning formation and this Sm was a good soldier never late for formation never a neg 4856.

Response by Sgt Lew Dunham made Nov 27 at 2015 8:16 PM

Sgt Lew Dunham — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 20:16:52 -0500

If you are serving the country in uniform ... you ARE deployed from civilian life and promotions should be based on merit and experience in your job, wherever you are based. The service does not run on special forces or front line troops alone. Never forget those whose job is to support ... in their own way.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Nov 27 at 2015 9:15 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 21:15:17 -0500

For myself, I set a standard. If I ever got to the point where I needed a profile to stay in, then it was time to get out - but that was just me and the standard I had for myself. After I came back from Iraq , in 2004, I needed a profile because I couldn't take the APFT, and I knew with the collapsed disk in my back and the problem with my shoulder I was non deployable, so I got out. I guess it was just the final nail in my "career coffin". If I couldn't lead from the front, then I didn't feel I belonged - THIS WAS MY PERSONAL STANDARD. I lost 10yrs of service I'd planed on, but I wouldn't change my standard.
I'm not saying this is for everyone. There are a lot of reasons for non deployable status. I also know there are those who shouldn't be in the military because they don't have the commitment. When I was SNCO (1SG acting) of a unit(USAR), we had a soldier holding a position in our unit. We got notified we were going to get deployed. In the Reserve, before the official deployment order was released, if a person had a chance to get out. We had a soldier who was in leadership position wanting out because he was in school and didn't want to miss any classes. The CDR let him transfer to a USAR school so he could stay in school. There were other soldiers who were missing school, but went anyway. I know there was a job at the school to be done, but I lost all respect for this soldier because he was taking a position which at the last minute we had to scramble to fill.
I feel if a soldier is in a deployable unit and is in a non deployable status, then this person shouldn't be in a leadership position. Our units should always "train as they fight", and if the training leadership can't deploy, then there's a hole. Yea, I know we all train up and down because we all are expendable, but when a unit has to start with a hole to fill, then I think it is very non-professional of the soldier to put a unit in this position. They can be used in the unit, maybe as Rear Det or something, but if this soldier was a PS, then he/she shouldn't be training the platoon to deploy.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2015 9:15 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 21:15:54 -0500

What if that Soldier's nondeployment status is because of a deployment? Are you going to hold a solider back that has put in his/her time?

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Nov 27 at 2015 9:26 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 21:26:48 -0500

Many times soldiers are broken while they are doing their jobs. I don't think the most equitable solution to this is cut and dry.

Response by MAJ Alvin B. made Nov 27 at 2015 9:27 PM

MAJ Alvin B. — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 21:27:09 -0500

I disagree. Blanket statements are too broad.

Each case must be handled individually (would you want to have an adverse action process against yourself as part of a blanket unevaluated decision? - I suspect not.)

You can become non-deployable for a number of reasons, not all of the within your control.

Response by SPC David Hannaman made Nov 27 at 2015 10:05 PM

SPC David Hannaman — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 22:05:13 -0500

It depends, if someone is in an MOS that needs to be done "in theatre" then yes, they can't do their job and shouldn't be promoted.

HOWEVER, if someone is indispensable and in an MOS that can be done effectively without deployment (I'm thinking network geek or global hawk pilot) then why not? We don't want to loose high demand, training intensive (and expensive) personnel because they have no future in the military.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 27 at 2015 11:59 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 27 Nov 2015 23:59:47 -0500

This post makes me sick. I see some like to quote the part of the Soldiers creed "I stand ready to deploy, engage..." And yet they forget about the other part "I will never leave a fallen comrade".
A good leader knows how to use ALL his Soldiers to accomplish the mission. Their weaknesses and their strengths. If we have Soldiers who get hurt in the line of duty, how can we even for a second turn our backs on them???
The new SMA stated there are 50,000 nondeployable Soldiers that need to go. So the plan is to get rid of these 50,000, recruit another 50,000, break them, wash-rinse-repeat. Do we really think there is an endless supply of civilians willing to take their place? Do we really think we have the money to continue this expensive cycle?? Can we really afford to let the experience of those 50,000 go?? Are you kidding me?? I can't say enough how disgusted I am with the ones who think deployability is everything.
And by the way, this is why there is regulations that prevent leaders from sending a Soldier packing based strictly on deployability. Check out AR 635-40. A soldier will not be referred to MEB solely based on deployability.

Response by SGT Bryan O'Reilly made Nov 28 at 2015 1:21 AM

SGT Bryan O'Reilly — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 01:21:01 -0500

i think it would depend on the indiv. and what they bring to the party as a skill set. and how they became non-deployable, but I have to agree with you. i have seen some sad donut punchers that were IMO an embarrassment to the svc, And also some stove up warriors who at 70% still soldiered better than most of the rest. I think it all depends on the circumstances.

Response by Red Arc Her made Nov 28 at 2015 1:49 AM

Red Arc Her — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 01:49:45 -0500

If you can't do the Job, you need make room for someone who can do the job. I've got a friend who deployed over 75 months since 9-11. He has a blood issue requiring a thinner. He is non deployable with a chest full of medals. He got promoted to e-8 with 3 years until retirement. He is training soldiers with his vast knowledge. I sure there are other soldier who couldn't carry his boots that need to be discharged. Before we get rid of these guys & gals, let replace the thousands of band members with an ipod.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2015 6:19 AM

SrA Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 06:19:18 -0500

I disagree completely. According to your post anyone who is non deployable should not be allowed to promote... Where I am stationed my unit is non deployable simply because our home mission is just as important if not more important than being out in the field and we have a separate unit with the same job that is designated for deployments. So if what you said was in effect we would not promote simply due to our mission at home. Also sometimes those people you see who can't do something have temporary medical profiles that restrict them from doing certain things. What if that woman is pregnant and you just can't tell yet so they instruct her not to wear a vest. Also why are you going to punish someone who has a TEMPORARY set back. Sometimes you have to look at a situation past what your eyes show you and as a whole, ask her why she can't wear a vest and take into account what her situation is rather than spewing hate about it.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2015 6:50 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 06:50:29 -0500

I was non-deployable for nearly a year and a half. I was promoted from E-5 to E-6 in that time frame. And I am still in the army today. Actually got promoted this year to E-7. So should I have been chaptered out in that time frame? If you don't know the reasons that people are non-deployable, don't jump to conclusions that this person or that person is just dead weight. Maybe there is a legitimate reason why they are non-deployable. Don't judge people you know absolutely nothing about.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2015 7:45 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 07:45:28 -0500

If the man can do a job for the Army, then that's all I care about. Where he does it doesn't really matter to me.

Response by LCpl Mark Lefler made Nov 28 at 2015 10:40 AM

LCpl Mark Lefler — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 10:40:27 -0500

While deployability is important that doesn't mean the person isn't good at what they do and doesn't have something to offer. Someone who works hard and gets results should be rewarded for them regardless of where they can and can't go.

Response by SSG Thomas Gallegos made Nov 28 at 2015 11:56 AM

SSG Thomas Gallegos — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 11:56:52 -0500

DISAGREE 100%! I was medically retired in 2012 after nearly 16 years of service. During this time as I was going through a Med-Board (IDES) I was a Plt. Sgt., Training Room NCOIC, Supply Room NCOIC mind you all at the same time.
We were in the process of changing missions from our normal MOS to another in able to support the overall mission.
I was going to Bn. Briefings, serving as Rear-Detachment NCO, taking all the normal phone calls, emails that the 1SG take to include the 3 a.m. phone calls about "Johnny Joe" needing picked up from the station and/or going to get a Soldier that was in a spat with is wife.
As I am writing this I read the response below by SSG Brian Jones that stated he "would take a non-deployable professional NCO over an unprofessional, toxic leader." I want to say I am not tooting my own horn but some will see that I am and that's okay.
While being afforded the opportunity to attend all medical appointments during this harsh time in my life I continued to serve professionally and assume all duties that were given to me. This was the only way I knew and the only way that I served because I was a team and mission guy. So in the end I whole-heartedly disagree. In my opinion once your records dictate that you are in a med-board process you would not be promoted anyways. You are not able to PCS etc.
Personally I took a lot of flack, but to this day I still get phone calls and emails from former Soldiers still asking advice and wanting to barrow on my experience and leadership. In your question I think you need to step back and look at the question asked. If you are barrowing off experience than so be it.
This is why I like the site though, you can ask questions and get truthful, honest answers.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2015 2:03 PM

WO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 14:03:10 -0500

I see where you are coming from on this, but I'm not sure it is being communicated in the correct tone. I understand what you mean, "If you can't go to war or the freaking field for a field problem then why should you be promoted?", but it feels like you are ranting here, like you have a personal problem going on in your unit or your experience with another unit in your time in service.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Nov 28 at 2015 3:40 PM

MSG Brad Sand — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 15:40:51 -0500

I understand your comments and understand your frustration. I think much depends upon the MOS and reason why the soldier is non-deployable? With that said, do not disagree with your comments about who and where to make cuts...which is easy for me to say from the Retired Reserve.

Response by CW3 Brett Jensen made Nov 28 at 2015 6:11 PM

CW3 Brett Jensen — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:11:02 -0500

So SFC Thomas, if i get blown up, fighting for my country and become non deployable, then I should be thrown out because I'm no longer worthy. Somehow, becoming non deployable make me less of a soldier. I hope and pray you never end up like me and a bunch of my brothers and sisters in arms have, injured either training to fight or actually fighting. Because, I'm sure you would be crying another tune. I personally led soldiers in combat, only to return and face a Med Board for an injury that prevented me from completing a standard PT test. The injury did not prevent me from doing my job or leading soldiers. When I was asked why I should be retained, I said I led soldiers in Combat, am I less of a leader now than before. Mine was shortest Med Board in the history of the installation, 1 question, 1 answer. But according to you, I should have been throw out, along with all that good leadership experience. BTW, I retired several years later after leading and mentoring the next generation of war fighters.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2015 6:40 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:40:57 -0500

Right now I am non deplorable as a recruiter and to say that we shouldn't get promoted is assinign. The troops that are non deployable hace a purpose here state side weather it be for a special duty or regular duty. For most it is not our choice to be non deployable.

Response by MAJ Alvin B. made Nov 28 at 2015 7:07 PM

MAJ Alvin B. — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 19:07:16 -0500

Respectfully, I have to disagree with this as a blanket statement. There are a wide variety of reason which may lead to being non-deployable, some of them are short term causes, others not so much.
Additionally, through a number of wars we have used non-deployable military members who are otherwise capable of performing their duties (e.g. these could include family reasons, medical reasons, duty position time gate requirements, etc...), to free others for deployment and to back fill positions so,others may go forward. Being Non-deployable has a number of causes. There is a difference between being non-deployable and unable to perform the duties required for your MOS.
Consider this, would you accept not being promoted when your number came up because you were non deployable due to attending a school, undergoing medical treatment, or some other issue that amounts to bad timing?

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 28 at 2015 7:46 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 19:46:16 -0500

Even though I'm not in this category, I think it's bull-crap to separate a soldier because they are non--deployable. Most non-deployable soldiers become so simply due to wear and tear on their bodies from Military involvement. If a career soldier is put out because of non-deployability what do we expect them to turn to?
This tallies with the ideology that we are all being used and dumped. there are several areas where they can be useful, after all all soldiers will never deploy that's the factual reality. So instead of separation because a soldier does not meet a criteria, they can be used in many other criteria that they fill, or re-classed if their current MOS is a combat MOS. Instead of wasting their talent.
This is why most Commanders keep some soldiers around even when they cannot make their APFT, but find usefulness in other areas.
Now to balance my point, I think if the soldier is a complete douche-bag that does not even make effort to improve themselves or find themselves other use, that's a completely different category.

Response by SSG Roy Harrison made Nov 28 at 2015 8:06 PM

SSG Roy Harrison — Sat, 28 Nov 2015 20:06:06 -0500

I only partially agree here. If a SM is nondeployable permanently than yes boot their asses. However; if it is temporary as in a pregnancy or injury then no let them heal or have the child then catch up. I do agree that if they are nondeployable they should not be eligible fro promotion.

Response by TSgt Terry Hudson made Nov 29 at 2015 2:29 AM

TSgt Terry Hudson — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 02:29:13 -0500

I have to disagree with you on that one SFC. There are a lot people who are non-deployable but still assist in the fight. Deployments, in my opinion shouldn't play that big of a role in promotions. What about pregnancy, what about people who are still allowed to serve with prosthetic limbs, there are a lot of what about/ifs. I do agree deploying is a part of the job, basically it is your job. But I don't think just because someone can't go doesn't mean they deserve the boot.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 12:03 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 12:03:39 -0500

SFC Private RallyPoint Member I absolutely agree with you, but with checks and balances. Should a soldier become non deployable for a period longer than 90 days (I'll explain why in a second) they shouldn't be promotable, eligible for military school.. Similar to a fat or weak body flag (gonna catch hear for phrasing it that way). Unlike the fat and weak body flags, the SM should retain eligibility for Civilian Ed TA and military awards.

Why I say 90 days as that's usually more than enough time to have acute injury and recover even with the slow process that army medicine moves at (for this I apologize, if I had the power to change it I would) over 90 days the SM has a serious issue that they should be focusing on and return to full fighting health.

Exceptions should be made. Pregnancy should be exempt from this or we'd edge on pushing good solid female soldiers out for wanting a family, that I'll never support. Even if a small few use pregnancy as a means to deployment dodge it's never worth it to risk losing a good soldier over those bad ones.
Non-deployment due to hospitalization should be exempt to from the flag on promotion.
Last non deployable due to special duty- DS duty, recruiter, etc.

I also wish the army would do a better job at seeking those with zero deployments and start actively slotting those they can into units to deploy. This way we'd have less e7s-e8s walking around with a lot fuzz on that right sleeve.

Response by SFC Brian Ewing made Nov 29 at 2015 12:10 PM

SFC Brian Ewing — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 12:10:45 -0500

When there are situations (especially Medical) beyond ones control then how is it fair if they have met all of their schooling requirements, passed their most recent APFT/PT Test and met all other requirements prior to would it be fair that they not get promoted just because they are non-deployable??

If someone is milking the cow/Sick Call Ranger as you seem to be suggesting then I'd readily agree with you, but if it is something that they hadn't planned or just happened then they should still warrant promotion even if they are non-deployable.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 12:21 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 12:21:11 -0500

Just because a service member isn't deployable doesn't make him/her useless...While we do train to deploy and go to war which is the military's main objective there are also other needs of the military. Someone has to be ashore while we're out in the field....so the military uses them to train service members to go to the field...they become our recruiters, drill sergeants, and instructors so they are useful to the military's needs despite not being deployable.

Response by MCPO Steve Spence made Nov 29 at 2015 1:07 PM

MCPO Steve Spence — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 13:07:01 -0500

Why was this person not deployable? Is the problem a short-term medical problem? Need more info to determine whether or not they should be allowed to be promoted.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 2:18 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 14:18:23 -0500

First off I have never seen -10 likes before. Secondly I would have to say that a non deployable NCO should be separated from the line. Before everyone unlikes this let me finish. This non deployable NCO may be the top NCO in the brigade. He/she may be nondeployable due to losing legs in a valorous act. The reason I say separated is because when you train up for a deployment you train as an individual, then team, squad and platoon. You learn the mannerisms, leadership style, and build confidence with you team. These things make a squad go from mediocre to lethal. That nondeployable NCO should be utilized for their skills. You don't make it to SFC with zero skills to offer. Let that person advice, assist and mentor. Do not let that person have a permanent duty with in an Infantry/ combat arms unit and then have to replace or retrain someone once it's deployment time.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 4:46 PM

Sgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 16:46:02 -0500

Why are you covering your face in your picture while you post crap like this? Are afraid that people will know your opinion in your unit? Seems like a coward move to me!

Response by CSM Gerald Williams made Nov 29 at 2015 5:16 PM

CSM Gerald Williams — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 17:16:07 -0500

You know I really try to digress from posts such as this but SFC Thomas you touched an area that you obviously are not the expert in. First, I would agree that there are some Soldiers, NCOs and Officers that are non-deployable who should be processed for separation from military service, however with that being said have you ever witnessed the medical board process? Probably not! Are you well versed on the MAR2 process and if you have subordinates have you shared with them how it works? Probably not! How many deployable Soldiers are left in the rear detachment because well someone has to do it and as a leader that should be a decision so hard that you lose a little bit of sleep over, why? Because you have to leave competent personnel back to handle all of the issues and rear detachment affairs. Do you think because the unit is forward that everything stops? My point is simple don't lump all Soldiers in the same category because of your experience. I don't think you would like it if the Army did to you what you are professing is the thing to do. Now if a Soldier is legitimately a bad Soldier that needs to take off into the civilian sector then ensure his or her counseling reflects that but if a Soldier is injured because,of what happened to them downrange then the Army should do everything possible to get that Soldier into the fight or ensure they are set up for success after their service to our nation. I see too many Senior NCOs such as yourself that tend to be the problem and not the solution. Maybe I'm wrong but you opened the can!!

Respectfully
CSM (R) Gerald L Williams

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 6:01 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 18:01:45 -0500

I'd agree that a non-deployable Soldier's ability to be promoted should be negatively impacted because of the experience gained. The PPW does that for promotions to Sgt and SSG. It's a numbers game, though. Sometimes, you have to have the numbers.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 6:03 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 18:03:27 -0500

I think if they're proficient in their job, they still should be able to get promoted! I do agree with SSG Brian Jones on taking a non deployable professional NCO over a deployed unprofessional! There is always room for both types!

Response by SGT Denis Donovan made Nov 29 at 2015 6:03 PM

SGT Denis Donovan — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 18:03:53 -0500

I don't worry about anyone else but me and the guys I am responsible for, when things go sideways it is irrelevant who didn't deploy just who is on your left and right. Everything else is just white noise

Response by LCpl Ray Kissel made Nov 29 at 2015 6:28 PM

LCpl Ray Kissel — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 18:28:13 -0500

My medical records and those of my brothers were empty. No one wanted to be non-deployable. Almost bit me in the ass during my C&P exams though lol.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 7:57 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 19:57:17 -0500

That's norhing there are soldier who serve and never been to any NCO school and still have Senior Rank, so how can you take one from the other, this is nothing but a form of poltice

Response by MSG Brad Hansen made Nov 29 at 2015 8:40 PM

MSG Brad Hansen — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 20:40:48 -0500

When the Army needed Soldiers the regulations were overlooked.
Now they need to shrink and policies are again tight. In 2008 my profile was fine to deploy. 2013 the same profile was no longer valid for deployment and I was medically retired. When the army finds itself fighting on mutipal fronts those profiles will be good enough again.
Prorated the 20 year retirement to time served and remove all Soldiers with a permanent profile.
Can't wait for the draft to be activated.
Good luck Soldiers.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 8:42 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 20:42:40 -0500

Depends on the situation. If you have a EM/Officer that can't pass, p.t. can't pass the tape test. Can't pass alternative p.t. test and does not have a temp profile due to injury and who don't have a skill set like Admin, operations or maintenance in the rear detachment then maybe they are a 5th wheel in the organization. If they have 18 years in, get them in sanctuary and retire them at 20 years if they are broken. I am talking about the reserve component here. Active duty, I am sure, you have your ways to decide to get them out by regulations too.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 29 at 2015 10:20 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 22:20:28 -0500

In my opinion you are incredibly small minded. I will grant you that there are some people that use that status as Asa way to get out of doing things but there are countless Soldiers that bring a hell of a lot of leadership experience to the table even though their bodies are now broken. Tossing that experience to the wayside is wrong and a realised opportunity to develop our future leaders.

Response by SSG Dj Winters made Nov 29 at 2015 10:59 PM

SSG Dj Winters — Sun, 29 Nov 2015 22:59:22 -0500

If a soldier never deploys, I can see your point but if a soldier has been injured during deployment and is in recovery then no that soldier should not be booted nor denied promotions. Life happens.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 30 at 2015 1:25 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 30 Nov 2015 01:25:20 -0500

I'm in the Air Force. I'm nondeployable. The AFGSC General tells us we deploy to the missile field everyday. I don't see how he gets that. We just do our job.

Response by SSG Michael Hathaway made Nov 30 at 2015 3:47 AM

SSG Michael Hathaway — Mon, 30 Nov 2015 03:47:20 -0500

While I can understand your statement from a certain point of view, I do not think it is really professional as it is not specific enough and will certainly be offensive to some. All those who are not deployable have their reason, most everyone is different. Yes, granted there are those who are riding a profile just to get out of the field exercise or deployment, we can’t deny there are those people are out there (who perhaps should not be in the Army). However, keep in mind that there are also those who have truly legitimate reasons.

I think perhaps your statement is too broad. Not all non-deployable soldiers are the same or have the same reasons. I can think of quite a few people who display excellent leadership traits but are not deployable. Your statement would mean the soldier who is missing a limb due to an incident downrange. While they are working on rehab and wanting to get back to their soldiers, should they be ineligible for promotions? Or how about the female soldier who has been working on points, but got pregnant thus is non-deployable, she should not get promoted just because she is on a pregnancy profile?

As for the apparent animosity towards those with a non-deployable status, please remember that there are plenty of support staff that is needed to be in the rear, even during deployment. I would have to agree with SSG Private RallyPoint Member, I would take a non-deployable professional (NCO or otherwise) over a deployable unprofessional, arrogant, toxic leader.

Response by SSgt Jonathan Dickey made Nov 30 at 2015 8:59 AM

SSgt Jonathan Dickey — Mon, 30 Nov 2015 08:59:28 -0500

I do not think it is right to penalize someone who is genuinely hurt to where they cannot deploy. If they are under the care of a doctor and there is a possibility for them to return to full status I feel they should still be able to be promoted otherwise the injury could result in them being forced out even if they get better because of missed promotions.

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Nov 30 at 2015 9:19 AM

MSgt Michael Smith — Mon, 30 Nov 2015 09:19:39 -0500

No, you're wrong. There are many reasons for being non-deployable. Most are temporary and most are no fault of the soldier. Punishing a soldier for an injury or illness (or even a pregnancy) is ridiculous, and also quite bad for morale and retention. You won't be healthy forever. Sooner or later, you will be non-deployable for one reason or another. Would you want someone trying to damage or end your career?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 30 at 2015 1:35 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 30 Nov 2015 13:35:25 -0500

my reply is why are we so focused on nondeployable soldiers when a majority of our force is currently and probably will not be deployed for any of the contingency operations that we are facing right now. It is not like we are hurting for soldiers to put in the fight, this is merely a force shaping tool like they used in the past, however, when the Syria conflict bleeds over to Saudi Arabia or Jordan or even Turkey then you will see the Army going back to those they released pleading for them to come back. I am a nondeployable soldier myself with a permanent S3 profile

Response by CPT Mark Gonzalez made Nov 30 at 2015 1:40 PM

CPT Mark Gonzalez — Mon, 30 Nov 2015 13:40:52 -0500

Every case is going to be a little different and deeply personal to someone. Very interesting discussion on balancing being a fighting force and taking care of your people.

Response by CPL Randy L Cutlip made Dec 1 at 2015 6:37 AM

CPL Randy L Cutlip — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 06:37:43 -0500

i think that would and should be determined by why you are not deployable..

Response by MSgt Eric Roseberry made Dec 1 at 2015 7:42 AM

MSgt Eric Roseberry — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 07:42:46 -0500

I hear your frustration, I'm guessing someone was promoted ahead of you and it hurts. Put your service ahead of yourself, focus on your troops.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2015 9:33 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 09:33:37 -0500

I agree to some of your statement. I am sure we've all come across some non deployable Soldiers. It appears you are painting with a broad brush here.

Just because someone is non deployable does not make them useless.
Unfit fat slobs who don't care about their careers. ...I agree, chapter them out.

Before my last deployment, I was trained by many non deployable soldiers during MOB. They were non deployable do to injuries sustained in combat.
Their experiences allowed our brigade a successful deployment with only one casualty. May he rest in peace.
Experience is gained while doing from trial as well as error. I am sure in your life someone has said to you, hey don't do that, trust me I know from experience. When someone says that, the likelihood is they've tried it and FAILED miserably.

I guess you're one of those people who think your Sh*t don't stink.

I would rather have experienced, competent, Non Deployable Soldiers training my platoon than a deployable know it all jackass setting them up for failure.

Response by 1SG Mark Colomb made Dec 1 at 2015 9:53 AM

1SG Mark Colomb — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 09:53:53 -0500

Labeling is the worst thing we can start doing as a professional force. Non-deployable status can be caused by many things, mostly physical limitations. Does that mean the Soldier has nothing to give to his/her peers and subordinates? As an SFC I was non-deployable while I recovered from a back injury. Should I have not been considered for the MSG promotion board? It probably would have ended my career. I was picked up first time primary and ultimately frocked to 1SG.

Certainly if a Soldier's limitations are permanent and prohibits him/her from world wide deployment they need to be appropriately mentored into finding another line of work. But to make the categorical statement that deployability the ultimate criteria to promotion is both short sighted and phobic.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2015 11:13 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 11:13:20 -0500

I'm not a soldier, but I know what it was like being non-deployable. It's not a good feeling. But that doesn't mean that service no member is useless. Maybe they shouldn't be in that specific squad or not specific unit but they can be repurposed and every job in the military has a purpose. For some services becoming an NCO is not a small feat. So when someone makes it that far and their careers thrown away it not only the services the military and the service is the service member. The military should expect more and so should we.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2015 1:05 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 13:05:14 -0500

Case by case basis, some people can't control injuries or surgeries, and some injuries can be a direct result of Army training. It should be based on performance as it, kind of, is now. Generalizing all non-deployable as sandbaggers is part of the problem with the Army right now...

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2015 1:42 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 13:42:09 -0500

As I read most of these post, it seems as though we are treating this as a black or white issue. I think we must take into consideration that many of these Soldiers who are currently non-deployable are non-deployable due to issues that were the result of a previous deployment. The Army has become a large, cumbersome, bureaucratic machine. Many times the Soldier realizes that he/she can't deploy and wants to get out but but due to the bureaucracy involved is held until the issue is resolved. In many cases these non-deployable Soldiers feel guilty, embarrassed and ashamed especially those who are unable to handle a weapon because of a psychiatric issue. I have served on active duty and am now a reservist and am also a military technician working as a unit administrator. I have witnessed first hand the bureaucracy at work. I have two Soldiers with issues from previous deployments who are now non-deployable. These Soldiers have been non-deployable for close to three years and completed and submitted all necessary documentation a little over two years ago. These two Soldiers have been waiting for adjudication and final determination or their cases for the past two years. These Soldiers have complied with everything they have been asked to do in order to facilitate the process. Through my time as a unit administrator I have attended training courses, workshops etc. and everyone I speak to says the same thing. Many times Soldiers like those that I have pointed out realize that they can no longer serve and know that it is time to leave but are prevented from doing so. So I think as we discuss this issue we must take into consideration why the Soldier is non-deployable. Is it a result of a deployment or an injury incured in the line of duty? I also think the discussion of what can be done to streamline the process for these Soldiers is long overdue. We need to do what is right for the Army but not at the detriment of these Soldiers who have served honorably. It is very easy to say, as some post I have read...they need to get out...time to send them back to the house...they don't belong. We must all remember that one day anyone of us could be in their position.

Response by SSG Donald Blackwell made Dec 1 at 2015 3:17 PM

SSG Donald Blackwell — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 15:17:33 -0500

I whole heartedly disagree. In this age of military service, there are many servicemen and women who have given many years of faithful and dedicated service to become "deemed" non-deployable through their military service. After 15 and a half years of service, I had a botched surgery which led me no longer fit to perform as a Cavalry Scout. I was given a P3 profile, reclassified, and told that I would "NEVER" be promoted again. My service to country was not over and I refused for it to be. I continued my service in a non-deployable status and contributed a great deal to every combat service support soldier I encountered. Most service members can provide years of experience and knowledge in other areas when transitioning or moving to an academic position. There is a huge investment made into every military person, don't "get rid of" a great asset because they become non-deployable.

Response by SSgt Gary Guinn made Dec 1 at 2015 4:19 PM

SSgt Gary Guinn — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 16:19:15 -0500

I will stay out of this one. We didn't have multiple deployments over 14 years when I was in. So I back out. Tough question.

Response by 1LT Dennis Presley made Dec 1 at 2015 6:30 PM

1LT Dennis Presley — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 18:30:30 -0500

Gee, if only there was a system in place that would allow for the most qualified person to be promoted. Leadership skills, communication skills and deployable status. Oh wait a board might work and peer reviews.

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2015 7:31 PM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 19:31:54 -0500

Agreed. We are paid to defend the nation. If you can not, you are not doing your job.

Response by MSgt Callen Cavinder made Dec 1 at 2015 7:36 PM

MSgt Callen Cavinder — Tue, 01 Dec 2015 19:36:18 -0500

Having retired from the Air Force I could not agree more, far too often individual seem to never deploy and other seem to always deploy. If leadership is the driving force or not if your not deploying why should they have the advantage to study over people that deploy all the time. Leadership makes it clear who they want to promote at least in the Air Force by pampering individuals and not sending them on deployments.

Response by PO1 Patrick Radcliffe made Dec 2 at 2015 12:02 AM

PO1 Patrick Radcliffe — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 00:02:44 -0500

Non deployable depends if it is temporary no big deal but if this is a career on non deploys then this service member needs to seperated.

Response by MSG Robert Greco made Dec 2 at 2015 1:41 AM

MSG Robert Greco — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 01:41:22 -0500

Two of my brother's were home when I deployed. We three are all retired now.

My brother's got us everything we needed, when we needed it! They got me in country and they got me out!

Yea, they were state side! But, they did a thankless job! They did a job of getting us there & back! They did there job outstanding with no reward!

My brother's watched my six!! If something happened at home (and it did) my brother's took care of it!

So they didn't deploy! Big F-en deal!! They protected me & many other's that did by protecting us from assault on the home front!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 2 at 2015 5:29 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:29:37 -0500

Why is everyone so against non-deployable servicemembers? I never understood that. Did anyone ever think that there is a reason, whether it's good or bad, why the member is nondeployable? Also, if they are still in, probably because the military believes that they are still of some use? It just kills me on the level of ridiculousness on many people's take on this subject. Also, SFC Private RallyPoint Member, you seriously believe that just because someone is non-deployable, they don't deserve a promotion? Seriously? How can you possibly justify this?

Response by SFC Douglas Duckett made Dec 2 at 2015 2:06 PM

SFC Douglas Duckett — Wed, 02 Dec 2015 14:06:32 -0500

Just what I needed, another mindless senior NCO who feels that if you cannot make a 300 on your APFT, you should be flogged, have your dog tags bent, and your meal card stamped “no dessert”. I needed this senior NCO to remind me of how sad I felt and the tears welling up when I watched my unit go forward without me. I needed this senior NCO to have me relive those feelings of uselessness and depression. I needed this SENIOR NCO to show lack of understanding and compassion for an Infantryman who deployed to Grenada and Iraq, but just could not go any further. I needed this SENIOR NON-COMMISIONED OFFICER to remind me of how my Army has changed. Thank you SFC Private RallyPoint Member, and may God never make you non-deployable.

Response by Cpl John DeConti made Apr 18 at 2016 6:09 PM

Cpl John DeConti — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:09:50 -0400

I'm not sure what your getting at here SFC... Seems to me you are publicly berating a group of your fellow soldiers which is not something I would expect from any rank above E-2... I have known people injured in combat who could not deploy, Are you telling me they shouldn't be promoted because they gave 110% and paid a price for it? I get it every branch has their shit birds but 99% of Marines I knew who weren't deploy-able had a valid reason. My advice to you would be, take a step back get to know your soldiers and their reason for the status and mentor, rehabilitate and train them to the best of your ability to get them back in the fight rather than bashing them here. But what do I know I'm just a jarhead.
Best Regards,
-Cpl D.

Response by MSgt Sandra McKinney Dent made Apr 18 at 2016 10:04 PM

MSgt Sandra McKinney Dent — Mon, 18 Apr 2016 22:04:15 -0400

There are many reasons; unless you are that individual's rater and/or immediate supervisor, you do not have all the information to make a decision. In other words fellow E-7, "It is NOT your concern."

What do I think? Is it one of MY Airmen? Does that Airman pull his or her weight? Is he or she an asset to our ability to fly, fight and win? Is this service or duty related? Is it a permanent condition? There are TOO many questions to answer first before I can recommend a single, simple yes or no answer.

Response by SPC(P) Carlos Santini made Apr 19 at 2016 1:03 AM

SPC(P) Carlos Santini — Tue, 19 Apr 2016 01:03:39 -0400

I would disagree because there is usually a really good reason for a troop to not be deployed. I went to Iraq in 2003-04 and after coming home I was suffering from all kinds of shit so the doctors put me on all kinds of medications. Well come to hold that was the end of me deploying to any combat zone after that but I was a pretty good soldier help training new soldiers and I just offered advise and helped where I could. I am not saying I should be Command Sargent Major of Army but I feel like I was effective in my job duties here in the states.

Response by SSG Jason Penn made Apr 19 at 2016 10:10 AM

SSG Jason Penn — Tue, 19 Apr 2016 10:10:22 -0400

I wholeheartedly disagree... It totally depends on the situation. For example, a quality soldier is the victim of a car accident, where he wasn't driving, and suffers a broken leg. He is placed as non-deploy-able while wearing a cast on his leg. Holding up his promotion for a temporary set back that is not his fault is just plain wrong.

Response by SSG Robert Albright made Apr 19 at 2016 11:48 AM

SSG Robert Albright — Tue, 19 Apr 2016 11:48:20 -0400

Depends on the reason for being listed as non-deployable. I was listed as non-deployable after havng two ruptured discs replaced with synthetics; managed to BS my way through the next SRP and deploy again anyway; so I dont have a lot of sympathy for those labelled as "non-deployable". Hpwever, that being said, to restrict all non-deployables from promotion would screwour bretheren that are forced to medically retire due to injuries sustained in a deployment. Many people don't realize this, but if you are promotable during the medical retirement process you are retired at the higher rank.

Response by SP5 Hank Vandenburgh PhD made Apr 19 at 2016 9:10 PM

SP5 Hank Vandenburgh PhD — Tue, 19 Apr 2016 21:10:55 -0400

Some MOSs will be less deployable.

Response by SPC Tommy Faircloth made Aug 2 at 2017 11:30 AM

SPC Tommy Faircloth — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 11:30:15 -0400

When I was in my unit did that. It took a while but they did make an attempt

Response by PO3 David Davis made Aug 2 at 2017 11:30 AM

PO3 David Davis — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 11:30:37 -0400

Not sure if the big picture is being seen. Some can make themselves non-deployable just to get out. That is why we sign contracts. At any given time amyone can be in that position.

Response by Maj Ken Brown made Aug 2 at 2017 11:35 AM

Maj Ken Brown — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 11:35:58 -0400

A few years ago, the USMC through which world-wide deployability was universal for all Marines. Failure to be deployable was grounds for general discharge.

What happened to that?

Response by Cpl Rc Layne made Aug 2 at 2017 11:45 AM

Cpl Rc Layne — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 11:45:11 -0400

As with everything else in life, nothing is 100 percent.

Response by SP5 Ward Posey made Aug 2 at 2017 11:50 AM

SP5 Ward Posey — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 11:50:16 -0400

Excuse me for the question, but I am an elderly veteran of Viet Nam who tries to stay up on what the modern Army does and how it does it. What are the reasons for being nondeployable? Are they medical, because of a specific MOS, conscientious objector, or what? Thanks for your info.

Response by MAJ Ron Peery made Aug 2 at 2017 12:47 PM

MAJ Ron Peery — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 12:47:20 -0400

Soldiers who are awarded the MoH are non-deployable by law. Should we get rid of them? Soldiers who are the sole surviving child in a family are non-deployable. Should we get rid of them?
Soldiers who have been badly wounded may be non-deployable after recovery. Should we get rid of them? There are a ton of valid reasons a soldier may be non-deployable. They can still serve stateside supporting in training, administration, or logistics. Soldiers who actively avoid deploying may be good candidates for separation, but not people who have a valid disability. Sure glad SFC Demond Thomas doesn't get to make that call. Bet if he was non-deployable for any reason, he'd fight to be allowed to continue to serve.

Response by COL William Oseles made Aug 2 at 2017 1:55 PM

COL William Oseles — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 13:55:46 -0400

One of the side effects of this opinion is you would be kicking outback lot of people.
* Transgender undergoing their change procedure as they would be nondeployabke during pregnancy, change and post-op treatment. (Yes I know Trump issued a ban but we have yet to see if it will stand).
* Pregnant Soldiers, a friend had a Signal Company where he averaged ~25% non-Denominal at any given time.
* Individuals injured in the line of duty but could still teach necessary skills. Should we shift all the non-Deployables to DIs? Or how about Recruiters, sort of like the Sergeant mentioned in Heinlein's book.
Could go on and on, but a blanket opinion does not work for a blanket policy.

Response by LTC Russ Smith made Aug 2 at 2017 4:38 PM

LTC Russ Smith — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 16:38:29 -0400

Couldn't agree more. This especially bad in the National Guard where you can make general and be non-deployable. A Californian was a LTC on 9/11, today here's a two star. Non deployable. Embarrassing. Elsewhere, the first four star Army Chief, National Guard Bureau was BG on 9/11. Never deployed anywhere on his long career. Embarrassing. And comparisons to Eisenhower are ridiculous, he's no Eisenhower.

Response by Sgt Dale Briggs made Aug 2 at 2017 7:48 PM

Sgt Dale Briggs — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 19:48:06 -0400

Disagree. My sons non deployable right now, on profile post an Afghanastan tour for respitory problems. He's his units Deployment Manager, he can pass the Army PT test easily , and he's waiting on word about orders for the 160th SOAR. He's going to fight his profile. He's not skating, he got sick in Afghanistan, it's takes a few years to rebound and he's moving on not out. He's been promoted twice post Afghanastan, he's proven himself in this time period. Not everyone needs to carry a rifle to be productive.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 2 at 2017 9:55 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 02 Aug 2017 21:55:34 -0400

I am non-deployable due to medical conditions beyond my control. I have gone through two spine surgeries including a fusion, and two knee surgeries within the last 18-20 months. BLUF: My career is over and I know it. As a permanently injured NCO, I understand that my time is done. I do not believe that my beloved Army deserves to have another Soldier holding up a promotion or only halfass leading his Squad in the field due to the previously mentioned issues. Army's first and foremost job is protect the nation. Now that I am no longer able to fulfill my obligations, it's time for me to go. There's no reason to be upset over the E-7's statements. If we cannot deploy (barring temporary problems), then we are no longer needed.

Signed,
A SQD LDR

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 3 at 2017 1:44 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 03 Aug 2017 13:44:37 -0400

Good morning. Your opinion is very broad. You begin by addressing a personal opinion about deployability and end with not going to FTX's. Speaking from past experiences and three deployments, I know of a number of things that are worse than seeing my unit go off to war or the field and not being able to join them.

Response by SSG Shawn Ireland made Aug 4 at 2017 10:49 AM

SSG Shawn Ireland — Fri, 04 Aug 2017 10:49:44 -0400

I myself got injured in line of duty with a broken hip that the Army refused to fix causing me to become disabled and have a permanent profile. Instead of just releasing me from service, I was moved to HHC Company and assigned to the Battalion PAC. I was given three to four sections that I was soulfully responsible for though I had no training for these positions. However I ended up revitalizing all of them to fully functional section that had not been in proper operating service for better than a year. I took the Battalion Awards to where only one to two medals a year were being issued to troops who by the AR's were qualified to be awarded.. The PAC, had a computer that no one except the civilian female and I working in that office knew how to operate even though they had gone through their required AIT, so that they would know their job! They didn't. I was also given the NEO NCO position as it wasn't even being done at all. For those unaware of what that job is, it's the Coordinator of deploying all local dependents back to the states in the event of War. I was also the Battalion Adjudants assistant. Needless to say that though I was going through my medical boards for being medically discharged from active service, which took two years, I was still able to provide a function that helped all the soldiers in my Battalion. Soldiers who were just receiving certificates for things that medals were made for were now receiving them. The families finally knew what was expected of them in case of emergency and I helped train troops working in the PAC, how to preform some of their everyday jobs to exclude filling in request forms from soldiers who needed help at Finance, JAG, or to have their ID's replaced. Then when my orders came to PCS back to the states for final processing, which took a year, I worked as The SDNCO for the Third Brigade of the 9th ID. I worked a 24 hour shift and two days off. I worked for Gen. Mc Caffrey. So though one gets injured doesn't mean they should be kicked to the curb. To many good men and women are lost this way. My being a Staff Sergeant, at my last medical board was asked to stay in and they would reclassify me with a different MOS, and promised to promote me to SFC. I knew that they had no power to promote me as after E6, your promotions come from DOA. They definitely could have given me an up on it due to who I was working for and the pull that the Officers and Senior NCO's that were on my board had being they were all in high ranking potions. So to say that soldiers who are with disabilities due to their job in line of the same, isn't fair to that soldier. They can always be given the choice to do something that doesn't require combat. Not every soldier in the military goes to a war zone during conflicts. But if they remain in the same MOS and are combat soldiers, then one of two things should take place if they are a soldier in good standing. That being offered a new MOS, or being medically discharged.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 21 at 2017 3:58 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 21 Sep 2017 15:58:54 -0400

I can understand where you are coming from In this topic however, let me throw a question at you. Say "you" have served for 16 going on 17 years and then get selected for the SFC list just prior to your 7th deployment (two of which you danced very close to death) You arrive at your deployed assignment location with the mental and physical ability(or so you thought) fired up and ready to complete any and every mission tossed your way. Then one morning you wake up unable to see out of your left eye....you go to roll 1 who examine you, they send you to roll 2, they examine you and waste no time firing up a Blackhawk to Evac you to Baghdad. You arrive in Baghdad where you are then sent to Landstuhl German to be told that you have an inflamed and torn optic nerve assoisiate with Multiple Sclerosis. What rolls through your head..."Your a 7 time combat veteran...how can this happen?, My family...what will happen, I was just selected for promotion" These things did happen to me and I'm still sitting here in Landstuhl German awaiting to be sent to San Antonio for more treatment....this after I've been told that I cant go back and be with my shop (NCOIC BTW) and that I will be Nondeployable. So basically what your saying is...this is my fault and a 7 time deployer shouldnt be considered for promotion and kicked out of the Army? Yeah...well I didn't come this far and sacrifice that much to give up and lay down just because there are people like you that feel I'm worthless. Ive had a shining career and held some very rewarding positions in my time and I can still be a great asset to the Army.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2017 7:51 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Oct 2017 19:51:47 -0400

I disagree with this. There are a number of soldiers that may be non deployable due to previous tours. They may have been injured or developed a sickness either while or tour, or even when stateside. To punish those who can otherwise perform their assigned job would be like a misuse of "government property". Yes, it is important to be physically fit to fight...but to say that a Soldier shouldn't be able to compete for promotion is a bit far. And let's not forget, there are positions that these non deployed can fill...and what about rear d. Rear d is no cake walk.
Also, maybe a Soldier can't deploy now, but that doesn't mean that they cannot reach you something about being downrange. Don't judge a book by its cover. Chances are, there is more to the story than the picture you see. Just my humble opinion.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 18 at 2018 1:45 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 18 Jan 2018 13:45:27 -0500

I understand where you are coming from as I was a Chief in the Navy and have seen this situation. Unfortunately my son (Cav Scout E3) has fallen into this situation and he is sick about it, but there is nothing he can do. He has had a 5 stage spinal fusion and is basically a poster child for healing, He madly wants to deploy and defend his country. Instead the recommendation from his spinal surgeon is to retain him, make him change his MOS, but not allow him to deploy. He has returned to too good of health for them to discharge but are unwilling to let him do what he desires and deploy. They are afraid that if he gets hurt it would be more difficult to fix him.. doctors words in layman terms....... So now that he is not allowed to get out and not allowed to deploy although he desires it, Should he never be allowed to advance........ I think not.....that would be Bullshit. He is still a soldier albeit in rear detachment.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 16 at 2018 12:21 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 16 Feb 2018 12:21:23 -0500

You were right SFC. Not only can they not get promoted now but they can't even stay in.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 27 at 2018 7:22 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 27 Feb 2018 07:22:42 -0500

Just feel like rooting my own horn lol.

Response by SPC Bryan Guzman-Piedra made Mar 22 at 2018 11:21 AM

SPC Bryan Guzman-Piedra — Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:21:54 -0400

Chapter packet?

That's what you do when you fail a PT test. Certainly, if you are non-deployable, the MEB or other process that is required should be followed, and that soldier should exit the service.

But let's be careful what terms we use.