40
39
1
SMA newest issue: non-deployable Soldiers. Have you read it?
So SMA Daily comes up and tackles the difficult issue, non-deployable status service members across the army.
He may be now sitting as the senior enlistedman of the Army. Often viewed as a semi-political role. Especially recently. But thankfully it's true what they say; that infantry mindset doesn't die.
Quick hits;
- SMA tackles the fact that our service is bursting with soldiers who cannot deploy. He makes the hard call and one people don't like voice. It's dead weight on our army.
This one I cannot support more. Especially working in medicine and currently in a hospital setting is the drain of non deployable soldier. I think we (obviously) need to handle any issues they are having (mental/medical) set them up to continue the care on the civilian side, and show them the door. This is not a disrepect to the service member or to sacrifices many servicemembers have made that led them to becoming medically non-deployable.
Secondly he wants to make moves to support and enable our leaders in the ranks that are combat leaders; the most effective and necessary type I think our Army creates.
Also; let us never forget. Black socks in PTs.
Read for yourself.
http://www.army.mil/article/158897/Dailey__Non_deployable_Soldiers_No_1_problem/
So SMA Daily comes up and tackles the difficult issue, non-deployable status service members across the army.
He may be now sitting as the senior enlistedman of the Army. Often viewed as a semi-political role. Especially recently. But thankfully it's true what they say; that infantry mindset doesn't die.
Quick hits;
- SMA tackles the fact that our service is bursting with soldiers who cannot deploy. He makes the hard call and one people don't like voice. It's dead weight on our army.
This one I cannot support more. Especially working in medicine and currently in a hospital setting is the drain of non deployable soldier. I think we (obviously) need to handle any issues they are having (mental/medical) set them up to continue the care on the civilian side, and show them the door. This is not a disrepect to the service member or to sacrifices many servicemembers have made that led them to becoming medically non-deployable.
Secondly he wants to make moves to support and enable our leaders in the ranks that are combat leaders; the most effective and necessary type I think our Army creates.
Also; let us never forget. Black socks in PTs.
Read for yourself.
http://www.army.mil/article/158897/Dailey__Non_deployable_Soldiers_No_1_problem/
Posted in these groups: 
Deployment
Deployment
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 91
45
45
0
"Non-deployable" is kind of a misnomer. It covers everything from HIV positive to pregnant to a broken leg to chronic back pain. The majority of non-deployable Soldiers are that way temporarily. They fall into roughly three categories:
1. Personnel on NDPs for pregnancy, injury, or illness. These conditions will usually improve or end after a period of recuperation, and the Soldier will return to duty.
2. Personnel on NDPs for injuries or (rarely) illnesses that will not get better to the point of being deployable again. These personnel require treatment to stabilize their condition, then go through an MEB/PEB process to determine if they should be retained, retrained to another MOS, discharged, or medically retired. This is the group I believe the SMA has his sights on. The process to determine each case often takes years, and it is indeed a waste.
3. Personnel who have "injuries" and milk them as long as they can to remain on active duty and increase their chances of getting a disability check when they get out. Or maybe just dodge an APFT. This issue is particularly acute among redeploying Reserve and Guard Soldiers. I have seen the pendulum swing all the way from REFRAD and get to the VA for treatment with poor documentation all the way to retain them endlessly in the WTU, where they go to an appointment once in a while. I would suggest a system where they only get paid for their appointments. This would encourage them to get treatment and resolve their situation, but not reward sloth.
It is quite a large number of Soldiers that are non-deployable for various reasons, and I think the SMA is onto something.
1. Personnel on NDPs for pregnancy, injury, or illness. These conditions will usually improve or end after a period of recuperation, and the Soldier will return to duty.
2. Personnel on NDPs for injuries or (rarely) illnesses that will not get better to the point of being deployable again. These personnel require treatment to stabilize their condition, then go through an MEB/PEB process to determine if they should be retained, retrained to another MOS, discharged, or medically retired. This is the group I believe the SMA has his sights on. The process to determine each case often takes years, and it is indeed a waste.
3. Personnel who have "injuries" and milk them as long as they can to remain on active duty and increase their chances of getting a disability check when they get out. Or maybe just dodge an APFT. This issue is particularly acute among redeploying Reserve and Guard Soldiers. I have seen the pendulum swing all the way from REFRAD and get to the VA for treatment with poor documentation all the way to retain them endlessly in the WTU, where they go to an appointment once in a while. I would suggest a system where they only get paid for their appointments. This would encourage them to get treatment and resolve their situation, but not reward sloth.
It is quite a large number of Soldiers that are non-deployable for various reasons, and I think the SMA is onto something.
(45)
(0)
SSG Clarence Blackburn
It's not only the Reserves and National Guard, I've seen it on active duty to Top! It's a problem throughout the services.
(1)
(0)
SSG Delanda Hunt
LTC (Join to see) - What are running a daycare service, The purpose of the Military is to close in and destroy the enemy, everything else is secondary. Pregnancy isn't an issue with Grunts at least not now, that's just one reason out of hundreds that Woman should not be in combat arms. Do we have a Military to win wars or to be politically correct. Maybe if the top of the chain of Command went out and brought themselves some discounted balls we want be in this situation.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SSG Delanda Hunt - Pregnancy is a HUMAN issue. Women have served honorably in combat for decades in many countries, and can and should do so here as well.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
When I was station in Ft Knox, Ky at S-1 Bn PSNCOIC In a MTO&E mobilized Tank Bn 5th 33rd Armor. I had previously been involved in a vehicle accident which destroyed the Talus in my left ankle, thereby not being able to run for APFT. I was instructed to choose an alternate event for the 2 mile run.. I had to appear in front of Ft Knox MEB. Their determination was that I be retained in my MOS, issued a P3 profile and continue with alternate APFT. That's the way things are suppose to work in the Army. CSM Dailey is right though all soldiers need to be DEPLOYABLE or evaluated by MEB on their ability to be retained or reclassified in to different MOS. If NO than assign to a medical training unit healed or separated!
(1)
(0)
40
40
0
SGM Matthew Quick Totally agree. I've had 13 operations. When I felt I was unable to stay deployable, I retired.
(40)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I appreciate a soldier that takes personally responsibility, understands and doesn’t try to milk the system. Well done SGM Wettstein! I left when it was my time, for personal reasons at that time in history.
Retention and being mission capable are complex topics that I believe the military has the tools to fix. Can we make the tools better… there is always room for improvement. Overall I believe a soldier needs to look at their position and decide to stay, possibly change MOS if they can’t get the assignment/promotion they want, contribute in a meaningful way if the Army has a position available to accommodate their special needs. If someone is trying to hide, for whatever reason, they need to be separated one way or another.
Retention and being mission capable are complex topics that I believe the military has the tools to fix. Can we make the tools better… there is always room for improvement. Overall I believe a soldier needs to look at their position and decide to stay, possibly change MOS if they can’t get the assignment/promotion they want, contribute in a meaningful way if the Army has a position available to accommodate their special needs. If someone is trying to hide, for whatever reason, they need to be separated one way or another.
(3)
(0)
SSG Audwin Scott
My bad attitude made me non-deployable and that's when I put my papers in and retired! I left the Army with a lil bad taste in my mouth, but you can believe me now I am feeling the effects of the 20 years of being in service on my body, so if I could no longer lead from the front I say yes it's time to go.
(3)
(0)
CSM Charles Hayden
SGM Steve Wettstein Way to go! That is being honest w/ yourself and the system.
America w/ little understanding of military life needs to better appreciate the sacrifices of body and soul commonly required.
As I age, my empathy for LOD injuries increases! Not so for skydivers or other thrill seekers.
Thank you for your service Steve. Chuck
America w/ little understanding of military life needs to better appreciate the sacrifices of body and soul commonly required.
As I age, my empathy for LOD injuries increases! Not so for skydivers or other thrill seekers.
Thank you for your service Steve. Chuck
(3)
(0)
SFC Dr. Joseph Finck, BS, MA, DSS
SGM Steve Wettstein SGM, thank you for your honorable service and your honest self assessment. My situation was similar, when I reported my injuries on my annual PHA, my S1 stated "be careful about what you disclose." I hope the environment of being dishonest or suggesting a Soldier not report an injury, illness, or disease is not prevalent in our Army, as it violates many of our Army values. As SMA Dailey related we must ensure medical care is provided, the Soldier is prepared for separation, and when separated the service of the Soldier is not demeaned. Honest self evaluations are critical. You truly set the standard. Again, thank you.
(0)
(0)
27
27
0
SGM Matthew Quick,
SGM, I was left a little confused by reading the article and watching videos where he had previously mentioned this. I think there is room in the Army for those who cannot deploy, especially if those people cannot deploy due to injuries sustained while serving. There are more than a few nondeployable units in the Army where these people can ideally help conduct operations from the rear. I've been shopping around for deployments for almost three years since I was in a nondeployable unit and wanted to go out and get closer to the fight (as close as intel analysts can get anyways), but was always told there was no openings. Meanwhile, I had friends deploy to Afghanistan, Iraq, Djibouti, Germany, Romania, Jordan, UAE, and Egypt that they were trying to get out of due to some sort of temporary personal hardship going on in their lives (very ill family members, significant life events like a spouse's childbirth, financial problems that would distract them from the mission). I never understood why the Army forced people to go who weren't completely ready and left behind literally thousands of people who were willing to take their place at that time. Wouldn't that be in the best interest of the mission and the Army? I think properly managing what we already have could get us further than trying to drop people who could man the rear D.
SGM, I was left a little confused by reading the article and watching videos where he had previously mentioned this. I think there is room in the Army for those who cannot deploy, especially if those people cannot deploy due to injuries sustained while serving. There are more than a few nondeployable units in the Army where these people can ideally help conduct operations from the rear. I've been shopping around for deployments for almost three years since I was in a nondeployable unit and wanted to go out and get closer to the fight (as close as intel analysts can get anyways), but was always told there was no openings. Meanwhile, I had friends deploy to Afghanistan, Iraq, Djibouti, Germany, Romania, Jordan, UAE, and Egypt that they were trying to get out of due to some sort of temporary personal hardship going on in their lives (very ill family members, significant life events like a spouse's childbirth, financial problems that would distract them from the mission). I never understood why the Army forced people to go who weren't completely ready and left behind literally thousands of people who were willing to take their place at that time. Wouldn't that be in the best interest of the mission and the Army? I think properly managing what we already have could get us further than trying to drop people who could man the rear D.
(27)
(0)
MAJ Raúl Rovira
SPC(P) Samuel Coronado, I admire your Soldier spirit to serve and to not be handcuffed to a non-deployable unit. Keep up the fire!
Also, I concur with your statement that there is room in the Army for the ones who cannot deploy. Of course, all within reason.
I share that after a 27-month Med Board I was able to serve an additional 5 years in the Army. But just like SGM Matthew Quick, I know it is time to move on and let the healthier leaders continue the fight. We need to be honest with ourselves.
Also, I concur with your statement that there is room in the Army for the ones who cannot deploy. Of course, all within reason.
I share that after a 27-month Med Board I was able to serve an additional 5 years in the Army. But just like SGM Matthew Quick, I know it is time to move on and let the healthier leaders continue the fight. We need to be honest with ourselves.
(4)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
MAJ Raúl Rovira
Thank you, sir. I am always trying to grow professionally and personally and the best way I see growing professionally right now is by training and actually getting into the fight on a continuous basis. I know in the end the Army must give priority to those who are fully mission capable, but I think it would serve the Army's interest to retain injured SMs for as long as possible and as long as they can stay engaged at least at the staff levels.
Thank you, sir. I am always trying to grow professionally and personally and the best way I see growing professionally right now is by training and actually getting into the fight on a continuous basis. I know in the end the Army must give priority to those who are fully mission capable, but I think it would serve the Army's interest to retain injured SMs for as long as possible and as long as they can stay engaged at least at the staff levels.
(3)
(0)
SPC Nate Raetz
I fully agree. Back in '03 when the tempo was just picking up, I tried to transfer to a deploying unit, but was met with a long wait list to join them.
Even today, there will always be soldiers happy to deploy.
Even today, there will always be soldiers happy to deploy.
(1)
(0)
SFC Blaine Berg
SPC Coronado
The problem with that is you will always have some that want to go to the fight and others never wanting to go. Then the guy always going doesn't get promoted and the others do and then you have Mr Hooah all disgruntled. That kind of goes back to the days of SPC7 vs SFC. Get paid the same but never lead.
The problem with that is you will always have some that want to go to the fight and others never wanting to go. Then the guy always going doesn't get promoted and the others do and then you have Mr Hooah all disgruntled. That kind of goes back to the days of SPC7 vs SFC. Get paid the same but never lead.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google