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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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!

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 ...

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)"?

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.

I concur

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?

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.

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."