Should the Army bring back AIT Drill Sergeants?

2016-03-03 20:42:07 -0500

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/enlisted/2016/03/03/army-taking-hard-look-returning-drill-sergeants-ait/81292984/

Army taking hard look at returning drill sergeants to AIT

The move would be a reversal from Army policy established in 2007.

Response by SSG Daniel Deiler made Mar 3 at 2016 8:51 PM

2016-03-03 20:51:18 -0500

Yes yes yes and a thousand times yes!!!

Response by SGT Jerrold Pesz made Mar 3 at 2016 8:53 PM

2016-03-03 20:53:09 -0500

I guess that they can't make up their minds. There were no drill sergeants in AIT in the sixies and seventies. Then they had them and now they don't. I have no idea which would be best but I did like the fact that in AIT we were treated more like adults.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2016 9:16 PM

2016-03-03 21:16:36 -0500

Yes I work as an instructor and we need drills

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2016 9:17 PM

2016-03-03 21:17:23 -0500

Yes they should. Will bring back the discipline with new privates coming into the regular army. Don't know how many new privates I have met that don't stand at parade rest to NCOs. Where is the discipline and respect for authority. It should be instilled in their brain. I should not have to tell them to get at parade rest when addressing an NCO.

Response by SP5 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2016 9:34 PM

2016-03-03 21:34:55 -0500

As a personal reflection, adding a layer of BCT type discipline during the 9 month radar repair school would not have enhanced my learning experience. This was in 1959 and 1960, and there were no obvious issues evident, at least to me. Students either passed from one phase to the next, or failed and were shipped to some alternate MOS training - often as truck drivers. The requirement of a junior enlisted having to stand a parade rest when addressing an NCO is one that I see little value in from my own perspective. Respect for rank, yes. Is there another way to accomplish the objective of respect while imparting technical/tactical knowledge to create the trained soldier? Just some thoughts from a couple generations back.

Response by SFC Everett Oliver made Mar 3 at 2016 9:47 PM

2016-03-03 21:47:45 -0500

I didn't have Drill Sergeants when I went to AIT in 71. I don't remember any of the Sergeants or Instructors. When I went back to AIT in 82 (don't ask) We had drills and I remember a few of them. Then I returned to an AIT Company in 92 as Operations Sergeant. I had 6 Drills working with me.... I think I liked AIT with the Drill Sergeants. Discipline can save lives.... And troops in AIT still need it....

Response by MSG Scott McBride made Mar 3 at 2016 10:31 PM

2016-03-03 22:31:38 -0500

Yes. AIT is still IET and those DS are a vital part of that process.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 3 at 2016 10:53 PM

2016-03-03 22:53:28 -0500

After the crap I saw down at FT Sam a few weeks ago, HELLS TO THE YES

Response by CSM William Payne made Mar 3 at 2016 11:01 PM

2016-03-03 23:01:25 -0500

It was changed in 2008 because we were having a hard time fielding enough drill sergeants to staff BCT let alone AIT. And in the beginning you also saved the expense of paying the added expense of drill sergeant pay. That was due to the reallocation of resources from TRADOC to support Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.

The "official" reason was that by removing the drill sergeants and the total control they provide, it was supposed to help the young Soldiers to develop, become more self sufficient and mature faster. Therefore they would better Soldiers when they arrived at their first duty station. . . .

The exception is for One Stop Unit Training, commonly known as OSUT. Where the Soldiers do not relocate to new units and keep the same cadre upon the completion of the BCT phase.

Response by SSG Nathan Bryant made Mar 4 at 2016 1:05 AM

2016-03-04 01:05:06 -0500

I see this as a two part question.

Drill Sergeants are currently at Reception Stations and of course in Basic Combat Training (BCT). AIT currently has the AIT Platoon Sergeants and the Instructors. The AIT Platoon Sergeants currently undergo training at the US Army Drill Sergeant Academy. If they return to AIT Drill Sergeants, I can only assume that the AIT Platoon Sergeant position would go away. I wonder how things could work if Trainees were to arrive directly to their BCT from where "zero week" could incorporate the Reception process of receiving uniforms, getting shots, etc - facilitated by the Drill Sergeants with whom they would go through OSUT or BCT. This would be the first and second year Drill Sergeants. Third year Drill Sergeants (and others identified as necessary) could serve as AIT Drill Sergeants. Just a thought.

The second part of the question (as I see it) is based upon some of the responses that I have noted to this question. Does anyone know a kid who is "great" at home for their parents, but then can be a bit of an idiot at school or in other environments? How about those Trainees who successfully make it through Initial Entry Training - well disciplined, trained, and motivated - but, yet show up to their duty stations with much new found freedom, a few thousand dollars in the bank, and possibly a bit of bad influence from their new barracks buddies . . . . am I wrong to think that there should be Noncommissioned Officers (NCO) there ready, willing, and able to Lead these young Soldiers and not place blame on whether or not a Drill Sergeant was in AIT? If a Trainee lacks respect for authority in the training environment, they most likely will not be successful in that training environment. But, if they get to Fort Somewhere and do not respect an NCO in that environment, isn't it the responsibility of that NCO and/or one nearby to fix that situation with mentorship, guidance, training, and even discipline if and when necessary? Since when does an NCO complain about seeing Soldiers not doing something that they thought the Soldiers should be doing? It doesn't take a hat and a badge . . .

After 9/11, the Army was concerned about retention. In an effort to maintain strength, there were faster promotions. This was effective regarding quantity, but not quality. The Army promoted many who were not yet ready. Those Soldiers became Leaders who with a lower quality skill set then became Leaders of the next generation who then possessed an even lower skill set. I believe we are headed into a better situation now, but we ALL need to check ourselves to ensure that we are learning and growing however needed to achieve greater levels of success. Someone won't care for what I'm saying. I don't say this to offend or to call anyone out; that's not my style. I simply say it because I give a damn about the Army within which I serve.

"One may have knowledge and experience. But, they are only a Leader if they are followed."
~ Nathan Bryant

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 4 at 2016 6:29 AM

2016-03-04 06:29:55 -0500

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member I served as an AIT PSG and I am sure I did the job as good as any Drill Sergeant, so I don't see the need.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 4 at 2016 7:28 AM

2016-03-04 07:28:19 -0500

I had them. It was essentially basic part two.

Response by SFC Chad Sowash made Mar 4 at 2016 10:06 AM

2016-03-04 10:06:29 -0500

Why in the heck did they ever get rid of them? Absurd...

Response by SFC Kenneth Hunnell made Mar 4 at 2016 11:14 AM

2016-03-04 11:14:52 -0500

So, at what point of time we remove the training wheels.

If the trainees haven't learned any thing in basic training. Send them home, you shouldn't have to hold there hands all the way through there service

Response by 1LT Nick Kidwell made Mar 5 at 2016 4:26 PM

2016-03-05 16:26:02 -0500

Wait, what?

Drill Sergeant at BCT taught us how to soldier, but Drill Sergeant at AIT taught us how to be in the Army.

Whose absolutely idiotic and brainless idea was it to take the DS out of the equation?

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2016 5:29 PM

2016-03-05 17:29:43 -0500

The Army (TRADOC / IMT) determines our mission and direction as AITPSG's via TR 350-6. Let me also make the point that as of over a year ago, AITPSG's and DS's schools are very similar minus pitching a few additional modules and weapons immersion. Are we to instill discipline in Soldiers, YES, although maybe somewhat inconsistently, as AITPSGs try to find that very thin line between mentoring and effectively disciplining Soldiers in AIT. Training and mentoring them through the "transformation process" takes building professional relationships with them in small and sometimes large groups which is a challenging task within itself. I attended AIT in 2007 right before DS's buried their campaign hats and became "AITPSG's", ask me if I remember any of my DS's names... Only faces of one or two. Mentorship was virtually nonexistent minus maybe a few of the student leadership. Ive now been doing this job for over a year now and truly believe that it will make very little difference if any by putting DS's back into AIT. In fact, it may get worse and heres why... If and when they do, how do you think they will initially fill these positions? By hatting and badging current AITPSG's, that's how... I also believe that the current AITPSG course will stay exactly the same while creating a an X and Y DS's at the schoolhouse. I would also add that currently, AITPSG selection criteria is more stringent than DS and if they return to one standard selection criteria (current DS) it would certainly impact the number of quality NCO's hitting the trail. All things considered, there really is nothing that supports DS's being able to "change" anything in AIT unless of course there are changes to the current regulations / policies that govern IET. I would urge our strong NCO's thriving in operational units to drop DS and AITPSG packets if you really want to make changes and face the toughest of challenges.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2016 9:23 AM

2016-03-06 09:23:29 -0500

Having just completed a stint as an AIT Platoon Sergeant, I'll be among the first to endorse the return of the Drill Sergeant.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 7:12 AM

2016-03-08 07:12:53 -0500

Yes

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 9:50 AM

2016-03-08 09:50:50 -0500

This is a No brainer. However that being said, let's not put crappie DS in so that numbers match. You still need to place quality in leadership so that you get quality soldiers. Right is right, wrong is wrong.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Mar 8 at 2016 9:52 AM

2016-03-08 09:52:06 -0500

I was OUSIT, we had them all the way through. Was Glad also. Didn't have to change and learn a new instructor!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 10:13 AM

2016-03-08 10:13:59 -0500

Unless life has changed a whole lot since I went through BCT and 11 months of AIT, I'd say Drill Sergeants are not needed. I was an instructor at the Signal Center at Fort Gordon years ago. We had some AITs with drill sergeants and others with Cadre doing all the leading. I marched troops to the classroom and marched them back again at the end of the day. We had NCOs who were in the courses pulling CQ and SDNCO and a permanent party NCO who acted as the Platoon Sergeant- seemed to work pretty well.

The shorter AITs and had some Drills to push troops but all they did was move formations - didn't see them doing a whole lot else, not sure why a competent NCO couldn't do that as part of his daily business. My Platoon Sergeant and squad leaders seemed to handle it with no issue by the time I was a not so young platoon leader. Infantry, Armor, Engineer and FA OSUTs seem to me the only place where it makes sense. Don't see how a Drill could find the time to develop the level of training necessary to provide quality technical instruction as well as remain competent as a Drill.

Not sure what a Drill would do all day long while his charges were in class?

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 11:15 AM

2016-03-08 11:15:17 -0500

I believe so. as I was going through WOBC I cant count how many times I saw so many things done wrong.. that I as a warrant was told not to address the private nor address a NCO About it.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 1:59 PM

2016-03-08 13:59:15 -0500

Yes, absolutely!. It's been since 1995 when I was in Basic and AIT. Never realized AIT did away with them. Still need the Drill Sergeants at that level.

Response by SPC Alexander Brandt made Mar 8 at 2016 2:02 PM

2016-03-08 14:02:20 -0500

Absolutely. I was disappointed to arrive at AIT and discover that, contrary to what I'd been told, Drill Sergeants had been replaced with AIT Platoon Sergeants. Discipline in the platoon didn't just decrease, it nosedived into the ground.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 6:02 PM

2016-03-08 18:02:30 -0500

You get more respect wearing the round brown

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 8 at 2016 9:56 PM

2016-03-08 21:56:26 -0500

I'm going to say this as respectfully as I can putting Drill Sergeants back in AIT will not have the immediate effects that everyone wishes. In fact it may not have the effect everyone is hoping for at all. Why you ask? For starters I too use to believe why did we get away from Drill Sergeant in AIT what was the Army thinking. Then I got DA selected to become an AIT PSG now I seen with my own eyes what the main issues are. I realized that everyone has an opinion until they do the jobs themselves. Some of the things I would like to highlight to the group is that local policies, class POI and TRADOC 350-6 dictate all. It's hard to train a Soldier if you only see him and her in the morning PRT, lunch and dinner and oh by the way they are mandated have one hour of personal time a day non negotiable. You can't scuff up soldiers or even deviate from the corrective action chart as it's called now days. That chart dictates what exercises the soldiers can do and how many reps they can do based on their current phase in IET. For those of you that wish to bring back the discipline by trying to be the drill sergeant you had good luck and get ready for 15 6 investigations oh which by the way if you did deviate from what is the regulation and local policies and are founded on the 15 6. Now your career is over. I strongly encourage some of you to educate yourselves and read TRADOC 350-6 and read the prohibited practices part and see just how bad our hands are tied also know that this is the same exact rule book for the Drill Sergeants. The last thing I want to highlight is that the BCT Drill Sergeant ration to Soldier is better than that of an AIT PSG in BCT it's one Senior DS and two SSG or SGT DS per 60 Soldiers. In AIT my cadres ration can be from 60 to 120 for one PSG WE DON'T HAVE THE SAME MAKE UP AS BCT Drill Sergeants. In my Company alone we have Five PSGs and if all of us have platoons in house it becomes quite the challenge to help each other out. Sure 350-6 talks about the instructors augmenting the platoon sergeant that briefs well but does not happen on the ground and isn't happening for us. As the instructors have their own leadership at the school house separate of that the PSGS and BN and the school house and battalion are always buting heads. In conclusion Drill Sergeants will not have the desired effects that TRADOC wishes to achieve so long as the cadre to soldier ratio remains the same and there is no complete regimentation across the organization and post. My recommendation would be to do away with instructors and revamp the AIT PSG program and turn it into the AIT PSG and AIT Squad leader program and have us dual hat have ait PSG teach poi as well as WTBD. My time as an AIT PSG was hard work but rewarding and I wouldn't trade it for anything in this world it honestly has made me a better leader.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 9 at 2016 12:48 AM

2016-03-09 00:48:25 -0500

I don't believe drill sargents would fix this new generation of soldiers. This true problem is much larger it's that the big army has taken away the power of an NCO. When I reclassed there was no longer ds in ait and the NCO had no power it seamed. These kids would talk back to the NCO and they would have to go to the soldiers NCO for any corrective actions and even then they weren't allowed a hardy smoke session. I saw one Pvt tell a SSG that he could not make him do anything because he wasn't in his chain of command and then only receive a counciling for his actions. If that would have been me when I first went to ait when there were ds but mainly when NCOs had power I would have been low crawling back to my company and smoked til there was nothing left of me. So in short before bringing back ds try giving NCOs some power.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2016 6:35 AM

2016-03-10 06:35:42 -0500

This is a very loaded question. I do not believe that it should take a Drill Sergeant to instill discipline. We as NCOs and leaders should be able to do that without a hat and badge. However, as a Drill Sergeant myself, and seeing the products that are pushed out of BCT, IET Soldiers are conditioned to respond differently to Drill Sergeant than to AIT Platoon Sergeants and NCOs. Private fear the Hat and there is something about the Drill Sergeant Hat that obedient.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 10 at 2016 12:50 PM

2016-03-10 12:50:18 -0500

No. Changing AIT Platoon Sergeants back to Drill Sergeants isn't going to change anything. As someone who spent time as an AIT PSG there is nothing that Drill Sergeants provide that the AIT PSG don't already do. The AIT PSG course is taught at the Drill Sergeant school. We spend several weeks learning how to conduct PRT, which is different than BCT. In BCT Soldiers are limited in what exercises and repetitions they can do. AIT has to build them up from there to FORSCOM standards, which is affected by how long the AIT is and how many other items, such as dental appointments they have to go to. For example, in order to move on from AIT all Soldiers must be CAT 1 dental, so they must go to dental appointments, which start early in the morning, which takes away from PRT and other training. The AIT PSG is responsible for taking care of all the problems the Soldier has that didn't get taken care of by the Drill Sergeants in BCT such as financial issues and family problems. As far as discipline goes, they started with the Drill Sergeants. If the DSs didn't instill discipline in BCT, why do you think they would do it in AIT?

As far as the CSM's concern about attrition, that's because the BCT units will graduate Soldiers so that the AIT units have to deal with them. We are much more likely to chapter a Soldiers for discipline problems and PRT failures than the BCTs do, but that is a command emphasis, not because of the Drill Sergeants.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2016 3:02 PM

2016-03-12 15:02:16 -0500

yes

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 14 at 2016 12:49 PM

2016-03-14 12:49:54 -0400

DS or AITPSG, really doesn't matter to me. I think we have ventured off the path of discipline trying to molly coddle young troops. Until there is a return to discipline and accountability for the trainer and trainee things will continue to degrade.

Response by SPC Sheila Lewis made Jun 14 at 2016 2:28 PM

2016-06-14 14:28:01 -0400

YES

Response by SSG Lance Wendling made Nov 28 at 2017 10:37 PM

2017-11-28 22:37:35 -0500

Absolutely. Soldiers in the AIR environment need that firm guidance that only a Drill Sgt can provide. No permanent party cadre will be able to have that effect.

Response by SFC Christopher Taggart made Nov 28 at 2017 10:39 PM

2017-11-28 22:39:13 -0500

yep...