5
5
0
As the AF changes so does the rating system, what are your thoughts on the new changes. I've seen three EPR changes in the 15 years on active service, we moved from less performance impacting bullets to more well rounded bullets to now back to more performance. I personally like the new system even though it has it's flaws, it's points to the hard workers who need not consume their time with more volunteer and school but focus on the job performance more while still volunteering within range and obtaining higher education.
Posted in these groups: 
Airmen
Promotion Points
Airmen Promotion Points
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 8
3
3
0
The thing is, for SF at least, most people will have all the same material on their EPR. Sure the dirt bags won't be written as well as the others, but in general, most EPR's look the same. with that being said, I think that volunteering and all the extra stuff will still play a huge part in who gets the best rating now. 1206's still require base/community support. Say Amn X volunteers and does good at work and that person that goes out and wins airman of the _____, they will get a higher rating than the one that does their job just as well, but didn't volunteer.
(3)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
Completely agree with you SSgt Paul Esquibel. There is no doubt that people should be separating the levels of performance. But my argument is when you are only allowed (1) perfect rating for a particular rank, what is going to be the determining factor that sets you two best performers apart?
(1)
(0)
SSgt Paul Esquibel
Awards or school probably, with the exception of combat related duties, the deciding factors would come down to the electives or sub categories or the persons personal opinion which is the bad part. I think that the only better system than the AF could use would be like the point system that he Army and Marines use, while I have learned the inflation stories of that type of rating I could see it being tweaked to fit AF missions and goals, what do you thing?
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
I would challenge to still look at the layout of 1206s and the points associated with those packages. Duty Performance still carries the weight. I think we wrap our heads around the axle too much on base/community involvement as the smoking gun on 1206's. These opportunities, in most instances provide opportunities for leadership/management that they may not yet be able to tap into. That could be a positive way of looking at it. Let the "Bake Sale" comments begin! :)
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
PO1 Andrew Gardiner - That's pretty much what's going on now, at least in my career field. Senior leadership is working on the "rack-and-stack" process for SSgts right now.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
My only gripe about the new EES is the same Chiefs who benefited from the old overinflated system "now" want to change the system.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Bla bla bla, The Air Force throws the baby out with the bathwater every 5-10 year seemingly just for change sakes. The EPR system seems to be the most changed item. We went from APRs to EPRs with many growing pains. All for a net gain of nothing, really. I don't see this effort being any different...
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
I agree that performance based is better than extra curricular base reporting, but it's all cyclic. Once it becomes harder to distinguish one outstanding performing airman from another, they'll change it up again. They're always looking to make it easier to choose.
Also, you'll get a new CMSgtAF in that has a better understanding, than the majority of the enlisted force, of what an ideal airman should be like, and he'll have the criteria changed or amended.
Also, you'll get a new CMSgtAF in that has a better understanding, than the majority of the enlisted force, of what an ideal airman should be like, and he'll have the criteria changed or amended.
(1)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
Who is this "they" (always looking to make it easier to choose). Yes, I'm that guy, the supervisors should be making "their" job easier. If you send 5 people up that look the same then you are forcing "their" hand to separate Airmen with other factors.
(0)
(0)
MSgt John Taylor
MSgt (Join to see) - If alll 5 of your guys/gals are 5's, then they all get 5's. Why create more criteria? For a monthly board, sure, pick one based on how well they keep their nails or hair. As for this discussion about EPRs, you're not "they." That would be all of the CMSgts in the Air Force, THEY'RE the ones that review packages for Sr. Boards. THEY'RE the ones that tell the rest what THEY'RE looking for. And it's the CMSgtAF (and AF Chief of Staff) that establishes high interest items to the CMSgt's and O-6 on the boards.
(1)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
MSgt John Taylor - If you give all of your guys/gals a 5 for performance.....what is your solution for separating those folks when it comes to promoting them? For instance, these five guys/gals that are all 5s.....you are now required to rank them 1-5....how do you do it? In my opinion, this is why leadership at the higher levels are now focused on "high interest items". I'm not saying I agree with it, but supervisors and raters create that reality.
(0)
(0)
MSgt John Taylor
MSgt (Join to see) - As a direct supervisor, you can see what they can't. Initiative, leadership, drive, who's the kindest, sharpest, brightest, best to work with, who takes better care of their equipment. You get to decide why Johnny is #1 of 5. Some weenie on a board can't rank them in your flight. Again, you have to provide a path with feedbacks. As a SrNCO, you know what the best kind of airman is needed to make your work center better. Just make sure that you let your kids know that "this'll make you the best "whatever AFSC", but this is what they're looking at for promotions. In the end, I guess having too many great airmen working for you, is the kind of pain any flight chief would want. If you're cursed with nothing but 3's, just rank them alphabetically.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The epr process would work great, be transparent and easily understandable if we adopted the USA enlisted promotion system.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
So in my opinion, the issue with the new evaluation, is not the form......but the fact there is a change again. I would argue that the failure of any document, is going to be the human factor. Supervisors/leaders need to provide the feedback and standards for expectations in regards to performance......and wait for it.....hold them to the standards and either guide or watch them succeed. I've seen discussion about how all of the bullets are going to be the same for some career fields; okay, again what are the supervisors/leaders going to do to address this. If they are all doing the same thing, I guarantee they are all doing at different levels of the expectations assigned. Most will meet and then you will have others who are looking for ways to exceed those standards. If they are meeting expectations, they are doing what they are supposed to, there is nothing wrong with that. Those that take a step further should be recognized to right as such. In my opinion, those are the ones who are ready to wear those next stripes. I caveat that with duty performance should be foremost with compliments of the whole Airman Concept; that is one aspect of the new form that I agree with.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Additionally, as front line supervisors, we need to accurately rating on our troops. If they are not performing to the standard, let it reflect in their EPR. It comes down to is to ensure that the people who deserve to be promoted are the ones who are being considered. As long as we can do that, then this new system should work.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I personally know a lot of fellow Airmen who are frustrated to have to compete for promotion with guys and gals who simply can't perform in the mission but are good at doing things that don't really affect the mission. Being well rounded and education focused is great but the Air Force needs is to do a job. That means that the mission should be our focus.
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
As a NCO/Supervisor, what do you do at your level to address/curtail that? I've heard this is the past. I was stationed at Base X and was told point blank by one CMSgt if an Airman has not supported the local Airshow, you can expect they will not win the Base annual award. This required our NCOIC to put some extra legwork into the duty performance aspect of it as others, but his efforts got it through the squadron and group levels and it won at the base level. Do not get your head wrapped around that axle. Beside Rumors, discussion, etc, have you seen any defining stats to indicate that Airman X was promoted over Airman Y because he volunteered for the "bake sale".
(0)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
MSgt (Join to see) - I know of someone who was removed from doing the mission by recommendation of their superiors because lack of ability to perform. Because they had all kinds of extra time as a result, they did things like volunteer in the community and on the base. Since they were out and visible doing these things they one a prestigious award they should not have been eligible for because of their removal from Ops. The award was directly related to Ops.
(1)
(0)
TSgt (Join to see)
MSgt (Join to see) - Standards are how we accomplish this. As supervisors, ensuring we make it clear to our subordinates that we are looking for job performance and not number of volunteer events, then following up with the proper feedbacks and reports of the troop doesn't measure up. We can't justify a "5" EPR if they didn't do anything that sets them apart from their peers job wise.
(0)
(0)
MSgt (Join to see)
TSgt (Join to see) - So on the point of "someone removed from doing the mission by recommendation of their superiors", (1) sounds like a failure to begin with from the superiors. Either superiors didn't hold those responsible for training the member accountable or didn't do what they should of such as re-classing this individual or getting him out the door. Since he remained, I feel as though someone saw some potential, as the member was resilient and excelled in an avenue given. Now if the member was rewarded an award directly tied to his AFSC ops, I would have to call foul as well.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google