Should Service Members (all branches) receive national accreditation for their skill sets?

I like where you are going with this. I was Combat Life Saver qualified and Security Forces (military police) certified prior to retirement. Both meant exactly Jack and Squat upon returning to the civilian world. I've long thought we are doing our service members a great disservice by not having equivalent civilian certifications/licenses concurrently.

While it would be fantastic of military training were accepted fully for credentialing, I think it would be even better if the military took civilian credentialing and made that the standard. The medical fields make that particularly ripe for this action. I think everyone would benefit.

Its a long standing gripe of mine, that I have shared with the most senior leaders in the Military (hey not my fault they always seem to ask that question"SGM, How you doing, what can I do for you")
Not only is it an accreditation issue in parallel civilian skills (Medical, Como, Aviation ect) but education as well.
A Officer goes to Military war college, is taught by accredited professors and walks out with a degree.
An NCO goes to school, is taught by peers or contractors and walks out with a piece of paper saying he has completed a required task.

I absolutely agree. A perfect example is 2 separate cases; first my friend was a fire rescue Marine at Camp Pendleton and 29 Palms. He spend nearly 10 years doing that, yet when he left the Corps he was unable to get a job in the same field in the civilian sector at airports without going to a firefighting academy or equivalent and getting civilian certification for everything he already spent a large time in the Marines doing. To top it off, for the certification he would still have to pay for the testing, schooling, and final certification evend though military air fire rescue tends to be more intensive with its requirements than its civilian counterparts due to risk of live ordinance being on burning aircraft. Why dosent the civilian sector accept military experience and training as equivalent to civilian requirements?

Secondly my mother rejoined the Air Force after I finished boot camp for the Marines. She finished final training as a KC-135 crew chief and maintenance. She spent about 8 years or so doing that before a minor injury put her at a desk where she now approves aircraft flight status prior to the aircraft being launched. The same issue as my friend happened. She was reviewing a possible transition to the civilian sector in the same field before she found that she would have to do all the exact same training she has already done just to complete the requirements for certification as a civilian equivalent. Because of this she decided to remain in the Air Force active reserve to finish her 30 year retirement instead of being able to transition directly into a civilian job that would pay about 2 times more than she makes now.

I think the civilian sector should allow military service members a smooth transition into civilian job equivalents by just directly certifying them if their job has an exact equivalent, since many service members jobs do not have any civilian counterparts such as infantry or any weapon class combat paths like LAV gunners, etc. Or at the least the military should provide civilian certifications for those that have perfect civilian equivalents so that when they leave the service they don't end up jobless and struggling. How many service members are stuck flipping burgers because the police or fight fighters won't accept former MPs or military firefighters unless they go through a police or firefighter academies? For a large majority of civilian equivalents to military MOS' to not accept veterans directly into the job market is ridiculous. Most non combat MOS' match civilian jobs perfectly and should not need additional training or certifications, and to force veterans to go through that is not only disheartening, but plain disrespectful. Everyone wonders why so many veterans are committing suicide after they end their service. Many veteran suicides are from non combat jobs. When our country puts so much stress and demands on service members and then just drops them jobless when they leave the service, it makes their lives very difficult.

When our country constantly asks why there are so many unemployed veterans, yet fails to hold us up when we leave the service is plain hypocritical and cruel. Stop asking why, and start asking how can we make sure we get our veterans jobs when they leave, and not jobs at a fast food joint or scrubbing toilets. Real careers are needed. It shouldn't be that difficult to either pressure the civilian market to provide simple certification via a free test (to validate they have the necessary skills), or the military ought to provide civilian certification while we are in active duty. It wouldn't be very difficult to do this either. Most Marines take MCI courses, why not just add a few tests to their jobs so that when they leave the service, they can immediately transition into the job market. It is much easier to get a job when you have civilian accepted certifications.

Just my two cents.

This is a great thread. I recruit for an Engineering, Procurement, and Construction company, and this is one of the obstacles we've chosen to address. Unfortunately there is a gap between civilian and military skills that must be bridged before veterans can hire on at Journey-level pay. There are good reasons for it in some cases, but not in others. For plumbers, electricians, equipment operators, and carpenters I think it would be totally appropriate for the military to adopt NCCER curriculum and evaluation standards. For welders on the other hand, the training required to be employable in our industry is extensive, and well beyond the needs of the military, so it doesn't make financial sense to adopt those credentialing standards. What we and others are doing instead is developing and implementing a training curriculum for separating soldiers at Ft Polk (gotta start somewhere) to enter a 16 week craft training program with employment on the other end at one of our construction projects in LA or TX.

Anyone in, or with connections in, TRADOC are the folks who need to tackle this topic. The civilian sector isn't going to lower credentialing standards to accommodate military training for a few reasons (like safety and quality), so the military is going to have to be the one to step up their game.

I believe it would benefit the military greatly if it borrowed private sector credential standards and ensured that military training included those so that military members could receive civilian accreditation. Perhaps there is some room for civilian credentials to flex to give more field credit for the military, but ultimately if military members want civilian credentials, we should adapt to them, not vice versa in my opinion. We wouldn't give a civilian medic a military MOS just because of their civilian job, so why should the reverse be the case?

One of the our partners, SMSgt (Join to see) has been doing an outstanding job advocating and education people on this on the Air Force side for Commercial Drivers Licenses. His team is doing some great work!

There surely is a disconnect. I know that service members who attend various schools do get some credit, but then must complete a civilian course to get full accreditation. It seems to me that the various schools commands should assure all civilian criteria are met, at least for their location. I recall visiting the prison at Leavenworth, KS and they has actually arranged with the State of Kansas to give certificates of training for certain skills programs provide prisoners so they could use those skills in jobs once released! Why couldn't a TRADOC school (I'm an Army guy) assure that the required material for certification in their state, be met by the Army School? Seems to me to be pretty easy to do and incredibly worthwhile. We know 90% of the servicemembers don't serve until retirement. We need to be equipping them to make an easy transition to civilian life for their benefit and for the economy.

Agreed, especially in the medical field. As an EMT, I have seen trained and experienced combat medics have to retake courses that they should actually be teaching, just to transition from the military to civilian carreers. One was even a parajumper, who had to jump through hoops to even enter a paramedic certification course! With the critical shortage of paramedics, and nurses, having medics re-take courses they already know is a HUGE waste if time and resources. These vets would be ideal candidates to help the Veterans Administration take care of veterans, too, so the whole process of states dragging their heels on reciprocity recognition of medic credentials constitutes workplace discrimination. It hurts the trained veterans, the public that needs health services, and the VA patients who are backlogged in receiving care. In health care, people who are not treated correctly die or get sicker. The status quo hurts the whole country.

This question has been hashed and rehashed, but the simple truth is the rank structure in the military is a relic of the Army of 100 years ago. Enlisted men remain the blue collar workers of the military, warrant officers are the technicians, and officers are white collar.

As 1SG (Join to see) notes below, a partial solution would be the military adopting civilian credentialing. That's already taking place in the computer fields, although those who really want credit for their knowledge should go ahead and apply to warrant school.

I'm not knowledgeable about the medical field, but the think a PA is normally a warrant officer. So there is the path for you, MSG (Join to see).

The one thing a degree offers that a military career doesn't show is the willingness to persevere through a pile of outdated information that you will never use again for four solid years to get a sheepskin. People who aren't willing to recognize that and act accordingly will be relegated to blue collar work. It sucks, but that's the way life is.

It would be wonderful if the world valued our skills as much as we do, but they don't. We do have advantages of discipline and commitment that our civilian counterparts don't have. But these have to be demonstrated. They will not be assumed.

Yes! It is complete waste of time for SM's to receive training if the results do not provide relevant accreditation in the civilian sector. The military needs to invest in its SMs, and an easy way to do this is to make sure that SMs receive relevant educational accreditation for every second of military training and OTJ experience. If the military did its duty to SMs, a person leaving military service should be the most qualified applicants in their respective civilian career fields.