McHugh: Job-based fitness test report coming this year

Army Times — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 09:18:25 -0500

From: Army Times

Plans for job-specific fitness tests could reach Army Secretary John McHugh's desk this summer, and McHugh told Army Times on Wednesday what the service is doing to create and study those requirements — and what might happen to soldiers who can't meet them.

About 700 soldiers at multiple installations over two-plus years have been part of a project "to establish MOS-specific physical requirements," McHugh said during an interview with Army Times reporters and editors at the Pentagon. He offered few details or deadlines for the study, saying that a report on the fitness test would reach his office and that of Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno in late summer or early fall.

However, informal reports to McHugh from Training and Doctrine Command officials have indicated "that when we finally establish these new physical standards, we will find that there are any number of males who have been ... in a particular [military occupational specialty] who will not be able to meet the new requirements," McHugh said.

The gender divide has been a point of contention, with critics saying changes to the fitness test could be a way to lower requirements in MOSs being opened to women. McHugh said the move had "absolutely nothing to do with that."

There are no concrete plans for what would happen to soldiers found unfit to continue in their fields, but McHugh said rather than requiring immediate reclassification, the Army could design an MOS-specific physical training program to shape up underperformers.

Odierno addressed job-based fitness tests during a Jan. 6 virtual town hall meeting, saying he expects a "functional test by MOS" to exist alongside an Army-wide fitness test.

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/01/26/army-secretary-mchugh-job-based-fitness-test-report-coming-this-year/22164215/

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2015 10:02 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:02:10 -0500

I am just going to keep it professional and leave it at a "told you so."

I know that this may seem difficult but we will become more proficient in areas. We have to expect more of some soldiers. We already expect more knowledge of our NCOs. They are expected to know more. They will be in leadership and lead. Infantry should be able to do more physically. They are expected do more physical tasks than others. It is ok that we expect more.

Now, we shouldn't flown upon those that are not expected to keep up with the likes with combat arms soldiers. They should all be held to one standard but if they can't ruck as fast as an infantryman in Ranger Battalion it is ok. I don't understand why anyone would feel any less by not being held to a higher standard. I am not as well trained as some others. It is ok. I am fine with it. I am not on the same level as an SF officer. I shouldn't expect him and I to be on the same level. He is expected to do more than me. I will applaud him for his success and aspire to attain his level training.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2015 10:25 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:25:08 -0500

Everyone Fights, No Exceptions. ONE Fitness Test.

Let's just change the regs as we go along, weeeeee ) :' so FEMALES can fly into Fantasy Island. Think we're stupid? McHugh leaves with Obama !

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2015 11:31 AM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:31:07 -0500

I think it's a bad idea. But maybe that's the Jarhead in me. There have been recorded battles that have been swayed by the ability of cooks and clerks to pick up weapons and perform combat duties. Every Marine a Rifleman is not just a saying. The PT should be the same, the standards should be the same, the shooting requirements should be the same.
So you can pass a modified PT test in the comfort of the US of A. So what? What happens when you have to deploy? Then the defecation hits the oscillating unit and you find yourself with no secure base? Or your convoy gets attacked? Or your transport goes down in enemy territory and you have to evade and escape? Maybe you can slow everyone else down that passed the harder PT test and get more people killed or captured. Seems legit.

Response by LCpl Joseph Lundgren made Jan 26 at 2015 11:55 AM

LCpl Joseph Lundgren — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 11:55:06 -0500

I have to say I am all for raising the physical standards for all branches and MOS across the board. I have seen way too many people severely lacking in that area and feel that our standards have dropped to pretty disgusting levels. I was Instructing in Okinawa and during the endurance course I had a female Marine who constantly complained that the pace was too fast and that she "wasn't built for this". We weren't walking but we were certainly taking it pretty slow since I kept her up front and she kept asking to be left behind. Now, most classes that went through there were not infantry and the units that were infantry did tend to make the pace a lot faster, but I think as service members of any branch and MOS we should all be held to a higher standard, and if you don't think you're built for rigorous training, then you're not built for the military. Having said that, my answer to MOS specific standards is that it IS a good idea, but we should stay away from lowering those standards even for an MOS that doesn't require physical tasks.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Jan 26 at 2015 12:27 PM

MSG Brad Sand — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 12:27:36 -0500

I don't have a problem if they add to the current standards, for specific MOSs. Isn't that what they have said for ages, you can add to be not take from?

Of course that is not what we are talking about. Sec McHugh, we all know the move had "absolutely nothing to do with that" but the proof will be in pudding, as they like to say.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 26 at 2015 2:00 PM

SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 14:00:29 -0500

Stupidity at its highest point. Just plain dumb!

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Jan 26 at 2015 3:17 PM

SGT Jim Z. — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 15:17:57 -0500

Why are we doing this it makes no sense, yes the current APFT could use some modifications but at least everyone in the Army, Reserves, and National Guard knows the minimum standard is 180. Here is another example of trying to fix something that is not broke.

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Jan 26 at 2015 7:26 PM

SFC Mark Merino — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 19:26:29 -0500

All the 1SG's will send their stellar performers and the Army will be 300 points across the board. For whatever reason this fact finding exercise is being called into play, I hope they exercise common sense and select names from a list of all current PT passing soldiers. Otherwise they might raise the standards across the board.

Response by CPT Zachary Brooks made Jan 26 at 2015 7:33 PM

CPT Zachary Brooks — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 19:33:09 -0500

Here's hoping Signal corps is going to be crimping cables and lifting switches!

Who needs pushups and running?

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Jan 26 at 2015 7:43 PM

CSM Charles Hayden — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 19:43:50 -0500

Do I sense new colors for berets coming down the road?

Response by SPC Stewart Smith made Jan 26 at 2015 8:31 PM

SPC Stewart Smith — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 20:31:37 -0500

I don't have any problem with it, as long as they raise the standards for specific MOS's and not lower them for others. The standards are already far too low.

Response by SPC(P) Jay Heenan made Jan 26 at 2015 11:06 PM

SPC(P) Jay Heenan — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 23:06:16 -0500

This is another program that further hurts Soldiers who are on a permanent profile. I am not talking about temporary profiles, I am talking about service related injuries that does not allow us score much over the minimum standard. I am a Soldier that has been on a permanent profile since '07. I have tried like crazy to rehab broken knees, shoulder, back and neck. Only made it worse. I can not score more than 220 on a APFT, which KILLS your promotion points. It is just going to push out Soldiers who are broken, but still capable of doing support MOS's. There is my .02 cents...

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 27 at 2015 5:28 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 05:28:26 -0500

People aren't reading between the lines I see. I don't think most of you are the ones who have to worry about any of this lol *prepares to suck it up and carry on*

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 27 at 2015 7:23 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 07:23:16 -0500

I think it's a great theory and it has been talked about a million times before. It is the NCO at the lowest level that is responsible for the physical performance of their Soldiers. We talk about how P.T. is an individuals responsibility yet continue to struggle with the one or two Soldiers that cannot pull their weight that in turn compromises the unit's mission, whether it is a team, squad, or platoon. We tend to try and separate those Soldiers from the Army instead of training them to meet or exceed the standard because it is easier...for us as leaders.

If you want a squad of super Soldiers train them. Train nutrition for an hour during Sergeants Time Training. Do P.T. with your squad twice a day if time allows. Try different types of physical training, Crossfit, Military Athlete, Insanity, etc. Spend extra time with Soldiers that are not as fit and help them become the warrior you want to fight beside. Once you have exhausted all your leadership skills then look at separating them.

I know we do not have a lot of time in the day with the seemingly meaningless tasks we need to accomplish but sometimes being a leader means you have to sacrifice some of your personal time to get the results you are looking for.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 27 at 2015 9:11 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 09:11:03 -0500

What we should actually be tested on, (tongue-in-cheek)
List of new physical/mental ability tests based on rank:
Officer - O-1/2: Be in the top 5% of physical fitness in his/her PLT. Able to endure multiple ass-chewings without losing military bearing.
Officer O-3 and above: Ability to hold bladder for 3 hours+ after drinking 2 cups of coffee. Able give extemporaneous safety briefings on any topic. Competently conduct serous incident report battle drill in 30min or less.
Officer - O-4 and above: Can read and retain information at 300+ words per minute. Does not have signs of carpal tunnel syndrome. Able to send 500+ emails a day. Has a green book on them at all times to take down O-5 and above's good ideas. Has failing eyesight.
Officer - O-5 and above: Must have at least 5 "good ideas" per hour. Must be able to read senior rater's mind. Avoids wearing glasses at all costs.
O-6 and above: Can run in formation at 12 min miles. Enjoys sound of own voice. Drinks more coffee than entire chain of command.

NCO - E-9: Ability to condense at 20 page operations order into 50 words or less. Ability to sense malingering Soldiers from 500m away.
NCO - E-8 and above: Ability to see Soldier with hands in pockets from 250m combined with ability to yell loud enough for said Soldier stop their conversation and go to the position of attention.
NCO - E-7 and above: Ability to smell BS from 1000m away. Can do 1000+ overhead arm claps. Enjoys running on knees without cartilage.
NCO - E-6 and above: Ability to smell BS from 200m away. Enjoys making Soldiers cry, but can still be their friend and mentor. Know's how to make promotion points appear out of thin air.
NCO - E-5 and above: Knows every SGT/SPC in the unit and where they are at all times. Can make missing CIF items appear out of thin air. Enjoys listening to lower enlisted whining because it allows him to build a mental profile of each person. Can ruck, run, or do whatever longer than you can.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 27 at 2015 10:26 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:26:55 -0500

My PT test will be how many reems of paper I can load into a printer and then write a report... I read this and sort of think of this meme...

Response by SSG Lucas Solie made Jan 27 at 2015 10:59 AM

SSG Lucas Solie — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 10:59:33 -0500

I think this is going to be pretty hard to implement. Having seen the quality of Soldiers that are coming out of BT capable even PASSING a PT test. Not only that but as far as recruiting goes, the enlistees have options when picking a MOS. Pretty much every Soldier would have come in as "needs" of the Army.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 27 at 2015 11:06 AM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 11:06:51 -0500

I'm not an expert in this topic but shouldn't it be, instead of MOS or Job based PT Test, Unit PT test. I mean, when you deploy you deploy with your unit, with your 92Ys and 42As. In the combat zone, the Yankees may have to do the same tasks as the 11Bs, having this clear, why isn't it more a Unit based APFT? CPT Private RallyPoint Member, Sir, can you clear this better so I can get it, maybe I am missing something.

Response by SPC Brendan Kearns made Jan 27 at 2015 3:24 PM

SPC Brendan Kearns — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 15:24:39 -0500

If its not broken, fix it until it is

Response by SSG Stephen Arnold made Jan 27 at 2015 11:41 PM

SSG Stephen Arnold — Tue, 27 Jan 2015 23:41:14 -0500

What. A. Crock.

I was a motor transport operator. When I was dicharged, my OF 346(?) took three cards to cover the number of vehicles I was qualified to operate.

The physical requirements involved with each vehicle were remarkably different.

At one point I was a squad leader for a maintenance squad. Should my APFT have been based on the duties of the recovery operator? The vehicle mechanic? The dispatcher? The shop clerk? The Class IX repair parts clerk?

Or should it have been based on the duties of the ammo humpers that constituted most of our unit?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 28 at 2015 2:43 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 02:43:13 -0500

As Motor Transport, I think our job-related PT test might include ensuring we can adequately sit for extended periods of time, have full functionality of the right leg (push down on the gas with your big toe!) and a practical mental fortitude assessment of how comfortable you are with relieving yourself into a gatorade bottle on long convoy ops.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 28 at 2015 6:51 AM

SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 06:51:43 -0500

This will be a good idea when all of our enemies agree to not shoot non-Combat Arms MOS Soldiers. Maybe instead of blood type patches, Soldiers should wear their MOS so that the bad guys will know who not to shoot, or at least give them a warning shot.

Bad guys, nor ordnance know or care what MOS you are. They will all kill you just as dead as a door-kicker. Therefore, everyone must be prepared to fight and endure.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 28 at 2015 9:11 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 09:11:16 -0500

Well isn't this nice? Job-specific fitness standards. I guess pretty soon we will stop calling everyone a Soldier. Only the Infantry will go through Basic Combat Training, seeing how apparently we all don't have a need to be combat ready. Well when the lines of Infantrymen get depleted during a wartime mission I guess they are just gonna have a way to teleport more Infantrymen to the battlefield.

Ok, so this is extremely stupid. Different fitness standards for different jobs. Someone please find a way to resurrect Patton or at least someone with the common sense to realize that a Soldier is a Soldier and they need to be ready for anything and everything.

It is this frame of thinking (some Soldiers are warriors while others are not) that will allow the Marine Corps to become the "new Army" and the current Army to fade into oblivion. Understand that America does not need a Marine Corps, America wants a Marine Corps... because the Army is too busy thinking about stupid ass shit such as this.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 28 at 2015 7:55 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 28 Jan 2015 19:55:56 -0500

Will be odd for the people that work behind a desk. Maybe they'll make the PT easier.