Posted on Jun 16, 2015
Should the EIB/EFMB be changed to become a true qualification?
104K
508
195
10
10
0
This came up in another thread about the Unit Commander making everyone remove all badges for training.
Should the EIB/EFMB which is currently a one time event to permanent award of the badge be changed to be more inline with the marksmanship badges where you must re-qualify every X period to maintain the badge and title of "expert"
Being a AF Guy, I have no skin in the game, it came up so I thought I would as RP!
Should the EIB/EFMB which is currently a one time event to permanent award of the badge be changed to be more inline with the marksmanship badges where you must re-qualify every X period to maintain the badge and title of "expert"
Being a AF Guy, I have no skin in the game, it came up so I thought I would as RP!
Expert Infantryman Badge (EIB)
Expert Field Medical Badge EFMB
Badges
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 65
6
6
0
Anyone who's ever participated in EIB knows that it is a grueling ordeal. Not so much the tasks portion, but the ruck march. I personally ruptured a disc preparing for EIB. This portion of the EIB is really tough on a body, and for good reason. To truly be Expert Infantry, one must be physically and mentally hardened. But this type of thing, repeatedly done would cause unwarranted injuries and waste a soldiers physical assets. The only way this could be done repeatedly is if you were to lower the standard..... An THAT is just not acceptable. Win it once, wear it always.
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
I can't see changing the standard practice of EIB/EFMB to annual testing for the simple fact that I tested at 3 different duty stations before getting my EIB. The testing standards were the same at each but the interpretations were different at each station.
Being I was 11B I was expected to maintain all my skill sets and review as well as teach them to my subordinates.
I say "HELL NO" to changing the requirements on the badges.
Being I was 11B I was expected to maintain all my skill sets and review as well as teach them to my subordinates.
I say "HELL NO" to changing the requirements on the badges.
(6)
(0)
6
6
0
As I mentioned in my response below, if these badges required a recertification, who would run the testing? When I earned my EIB, the testing stations were run by infantryman that had already earned the badge.
I would disagree strongly with a recert requirement. You may as well do away with the badges altogether if you're going to require that. They won't mean as much.
I would disagree strongly with a recert requirement. You may as well do away with the badges altogether if you're going to require that. They won't mean as much.
(6)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
WO1 Matthew Scraper, totally see that as a potential problem. That actually highlights the whole "expert" thing in the first place and the arguments levied by some here that the odds of someone not passing again would be slim because they "stay qualified" by doing the job.
(1)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
SFC Olivero Rodriguez, serial downvote all you want. it doesn't bother me any. It just reflects poorly on your level of professionalism to downvote and at least not comment on why.
http://support.rallypoint.com/customer/portal/articles/1401594-down-voting
http://support.rallypoint.com/customer/portal/articles/1401594-down-voting
(1)
(0)
SFC Olivero Rodriguez
sorry I was looking in one place and down vote in another, again I am sorry my friend, I agree with you on what you said. That was the way it was done in Panama, just the expert to test the expert.
(2)
(0)
6
6
0
While I see logic to both positions, my opinion is that it remain a one time award. I am a holder of the EIB and although no longer in the Army and remembering how difficult it was to attain once, the thought of having to go through an annual requal is not pleasant. We have our "performance band" of operational readiness, at least we did when I was active, with that sine wave of individual/unit readiness. Ideally the trough of that wave was still within the band parameters but not somewhere we want to reside. EIB and EFMB represent the peak of that wave and is also somewhere it is not practical to reside. Especially considering all the other readiness exercises and evaluations one has to participate in. If I remember correctly, only 10% or 11% of the soldiers who tested passed and received that coveted blue badge. Not quite as rigorous as the EFMB but certainly within spitting distance. Besides, there is an annual PT test and marksmanship qualification test. Think of it this way, you train up to run a marathon or do an Ironman distance triathlon, for example. You are at the peak of your physical fitness but you cannot maintain that level for an extended duration. Same applies here. Recognize the achievement for what it is and enjoy the accomplishment.
(6)
(0)
5
5
0
No it should not be a re-qualifying task, as this is an elite award given to select Infantrymen who go through grueling and strict tasks to prove themselves as experts in their skillset, boost confidence , leadership skills, and builds morale. This is what sets individuals apart and drives other infantrymen to strive to get it. If it's just another annual qual then it would be treated as just another day or days in the field. Every infantryman has to re-qual with m4, 240, 249, ect... Retake the APFT, and do training throughout the year on various tasks. Now I would say by re-qualifying/passing all of these tasks are sufficient in proving they are still capable to do their jobs.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
NO.... maybe limit the number of times a soldier may test??? or have it at the end of A.I.T.
... and those who get it get a promotion right there....
... and those who get it get a promotion right there....
(5)
(0)
SSG Shawn Stauffer
I wouldn't limit the number of times a soldier tests for the EIB. Just the lead up to the actual testing( pre-training) let alone the test itself is an invaluable training tool. I flunked out entire battalions that didn't pass one of my stations, but ( as long as no one still in the running was waiting) I would spend all day with a soldier who wanted to learn and better himself.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
No,the EIB is a prestigious badge, that is hard enough to earn in its own right. I'm not opposed to limiting the number of times a soldier may test for this, but not re-qualify... what then, are we going to set levels of skill for line unit infantrymen, like marksman infantry badge or sharpgrunter?
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
If you are awarded a badge for training and AR-670-1 allows for it to be displayed on your uniform then you should be permitted to wear it. The EIB is an award for an accomplishment, just like an ARCOM, Unit Citation, Combat Patch ..... these do not require re-certification. The idea that you would need to re-qualify is just stupid. I assume it would not be welcomed all that warmly in the ranks.
(5)
(0)
While I have not earned either badge, but I certainly know a few that have them. And knowing what I do know, in that those badges are extremely hard to get and are very coveted, making them to be "re-earned" on a regular basis will severely piss a bunch of people off and then all of the high ranking brass will probably start to wonder why no one wants to go for those badges.
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
I think not, because having demonstrated these skills proves that you have the knowledge and the capacity to perform at that level. Medics and infantrymen are dealing with highly perishable skills, but these are soldiers that met the standard from their unit, and there's no reason to expect they'd perform worse over time after they return. This seems less true for medics, as medical standards can be a bit more fluid and can change on a monthly basis.
As far as retraining goes, as I said this seems unnecessary. But, EFMB award winners are in a unique position in that they are often tasked with running these events, essentially teaching the standard, and 're-learning' in the process.
How did I do? Haven't had my coffee yet.
As far as retraining goes, as I said this seems unnecessary. But, EFMB award winners are in a unique position in that they are often tasked with running these events, essentially teaching the standard, and 're-learning' in the process.
How did I do? Haven't had my coffee yet.
(5)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
SPC (Join to see), you kind of gave the answer of why the EFMB should be a "renewal" badge.
" there's no reason to expect they'd perform worse over time"
I would disagree, even the AFPT test is graded on a curve because you are going to preform worse over time. The more senior you become, the less in-touch you can (not always) become with many of the basic skills.
" there's no reason to expect they'd perform worse over time"
I would disagree, even the AFPT test is graded on a curve because you are going to preform worse over time. The more senior you become, the less in-touch you can (not always) become with many of the basic skills.
(1)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
TSgt Joshua Copeland Let's blame the coffee, then. I'll try again:
The EFMB badge, as it is, is more of an award than a qualification. This does not diminish its impact. EFMB award winners are exceptional, and seem to remain so throughout their career, though my perspective on this is admittedly limited. Medical skills are maintained as a requirement to stay in the MOS, so there is a baseline for medical knowledge established throughout the MOS (EMT, formerly EMT-Basic).
The EFMB is not a higher medical requirement, nor is it set up that way. It is a badge awarded to those that perform to standard consistently, and in adverse conditions. To change it to a perishable qualification, like Pt or weapons training would be logistically insane and counter-productive, as all medics that maintain their MOS already perform most of these medical procedures in training throughout their career.
Now, if you're really advocating for the EFMB actually becoming a higher medical standard, why not instead advocate for integrated civilian-style training, like a paramedic course, lvn course (also known as 68WM6), or something else? If that gets a badge too, I'm cool with that. Getting rid of the EFMB (as it is)? I wouldn't like it, but it wouldn't be crazy to consider.
TL;DR: regarding EFMB, the soldiers are already expected to be proficient in these skills. EFMB proves who have made themselves experts in integrating medical and soldier skills. Hence the name.
The EFMB badge, as it is, is more of an award than a qualification. This does not diminish its impact. EFMB award winners are exceptional, and seem to remain so throughout their career, though my perspective on this is admittedly limited. Medical skills are maintained as a requirement to stay in the MOS, so there is a baseline for medical knowledge established throughout the MOS (EMT, formerly EMT-Basic).
The EFMB is not a higher medical requirement, nor is it set up that way. It is a badge awarded to those that perform to standard consistently, and in adverse conditions. To change it to a perishable qualification, like Pt or weapons training would be logistically insane and counter-productive, as all medics that maintain their MOS already perform most of these medical procedures in training throughout their career.
Now, if you're really advocating for the EFMB actually becoming a higher medical standard, why not instead advocate for integrated civilian-style training, like a paramedic course, lvn course (also known as 68WM6), or something else? If that gets a badge too, I'm cool with that. Getting rid of the EFMB (as it is)? I wouldn't like it, but it wouldn't be crazy to consider.
TL;DR: regarding EFMB, the soldiers are already expected to be proficient in these skills. EFMB proves who have made themselves experts in integrating medical and soldier skills. Hence the name.
(2)
(0)
TSgt Joshua Copeland
SPC (Join to see), I am picking up what you are putting down! That said, aren't the solider skills just as perishable? How many folks shoot expert one time and fail to the next?
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google