New Command Senior Chief rating: good idea/bad idea?

PO1 Michael G. — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 21:45:17 -0400

The Navy announced the new CMDCS rating today, and so far the reaction I've seen in other social media and directly from other Sailors ranges from cynical to outright opposition. I'm curious what the Rally Point community has to say

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=90372

Navy Announces Command Senior Chief Rating

NAVADMIN 177/15, released July 29, establishes the Command Senior Chief (CMDCS) rating to provide earlier leadership opp

Response by CPO Joseph Grant made Jul 29 at 2015 9:53 PM

CPO Joseph Grant — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 21:53:51 -0400

Hell, I don't even agree with the CMDCM rating. Makes things more political than they have to be. I'm a deck plate Chief. That's where we need to be, not kissing an Admirals ass be. We are paid/ made to take the right position, not the one popular at the minute.

INITIATED AND PROUD!

Response by PO1 G. Leslie /Stiltner made Jul 29 at 2015 10:26 PM

PO1 G. Leslie /Stiltner — Wed, 29 Jul 2015 22:26:30 -0400

Are they doing this because there are not enough Master Chiefs to fill the billets? If that's the case promote them SCPOs to MCPO!!

Response by CPO Gregory Smith made Jul 30 at 2015 7:43 AM

CPO Gregory Smith — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 07:43:32 -0400

I think it's a good idea. It takes CMDCS's out of their source rating and opens up advancement quotas. The USMC has a similar program. At the E8 level you can opt for the administration track (1Sgt, SMaj, and so on) or stay on the deck plates. Maybe one of our Marine brothers can expand on that.

Response by LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow made Jul 30 at 2015 12:41 PM

LCDR Rabbah Rona Matlow — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 12:41:33 -0400

I have sort of mixed feelings about this. There are a lot of points raised on both sides. In the end though, just as the Navy created the NC rating for what was originally a collateral duty, I guess it works this way here too... At one time Senior Enlisted adviser was a collateral duty too, but then it became a full time billet. It does make sense for CMDC/CS/CM to compete for the job based on overall competency, not just rating performance. I am afraid, though that with the eval system with quotas, a hot running Chief on a top flight ship will not do as well as a Chief who might be ranked lower if competing together, but ranked against those on a lower flight ship. This is a problem for department heads too...

Ultimately there needs to be a Fleet/Force ranking for Chiefs in the running for these jobs, not just based on their command performance reports, in order to equalize the arbitrariness and unfairness of the quota ranking...

Response by PO1 Glenn Boucher made Jul 30 at 2015 2:14 PM

PO1 Glenn Boucher — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 14:14:16 -0400

Personally I don't think its a good idea, it will only create new advancement problems. We know already many ratings are tight and advancement is tough, creating new paths isn't going to help much because rather quickly they will fill the quotas and then advancement will become stagnant.
Nothing wrong with the senior E-7, 8 or 9 taking on the Command Chief role as they used to do. Creating new titles and billets is not helping much.

Response by PO1 Scott Cottrell made Jul 30 at 2015 4:13 PM

PO1 Scott Cottrell — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:13:47 -0400

My first command had a CMDCS, that was 1987. That was TACRON 11 (Tactical Air Control Squadron 11) or VTC-11. Can't remember Senior's name, I know he was a prior OSCS. But, he wore CMDCS Rating while he was stationed with VTC-11.

Response by PO1 Shahida Marmol made Jul 30 at 2015 4:21 PM

PO1 Shahida Marmol — Thu, 30 Jul 2015 16:21:10 -0400

I had a Command Senior Chief while working on the USS Constitution. He was HMCS Abele. That man had a great impact on us. AND to top it off there was a Master Chief that worked under him until he retired!!!! I think as long as they can handle being the Senior Enlisted Representative at the command why does it matter if he is an E-8.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Aug 1 at 2015 6:45 AM

PO1 John Miller — Sat, 01 Aug 2015 06:45:01 -0400

What's wrong with leaving Command Chief/Senior Chief as a collateral duty, and how is this going to be different from Senior Chiefs who are already serving as a CMDCS? Is it that CMDCS will now be a "rating" like CMDCM?