Posted on Oct 6, 2015
Was going away from requiring an NCOES school to become an NCO a bad move?
43.8K
149
95
19
19
0
A long time ago when I first came into the Army as a young PFC you were required to attend PLDC, or Primary Leadership Development Course, before you could pin on your stripes. Even those of us that were promoted on a waiver while deployed had to attend within a certain timeframe or we would lose our stripes.
I was a fan of this system. I believe that institutional instruction was an asset to professional development. But when the Army moved to the Warrior Leaders Course only being a requirement to attain the promotable status as a SGT we lost ground in professional development. Over time you would have less and less institutionally trained NCOs developing other NCOs. I have found that the SSD's try to make up for this but I rarely find that anyone take these serious. They are more of a check the blocks than the gates to being an NCO.
For those that have been in long enough do believe this affected the NCO corps? Did the Army NCO Corps maintain their professionalism without going to the school house to be an NCO?
I was a fan of this system. I believe that institutional instruction was an asset to professional development. But when the Army moved to the Warrior Leaders Course only being a requirement to attain the promotable status as a SGT we lost ground in professional development. Over time you would have less and less institutionally trained NCOs developing other NCOs. I have found that the SSD's try to make up for this but I rarely find that anyone take these serious. They are more of a check the blocks than the gates to being an NCO.
For those that have been in long enough do believe this affected the NCO corps? Did the Army NCO Corps maintain their professionalism without going to the school house to be an NCO?
Posted in these groups: Non-Commissioned Officer Academy (NCOA)
Basic Leaders Course (BLC formerly WLC PLDC)
Promotions
Basic Leaders Course (BLC formerly WLC PLDC) Promotions
Edited 10 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 41
18
18
0
Fortunately for me I came up thru the old days. Yes, LT, I believe the NCO core is somewhat compromised. The core is filled with cut-throat NCO & NCOER bullet chasers. Mentorship is gone, Soldiers promoted to fast and they do not understand what it takes and mean to be a NCO. NCOES has nothing to do with except WLC being cut to two weeks. I don't think NCOES makes you a professional, it's the leaders grooming, teaching, coaching & mentoring Soldiers, which is no longer the case.
(18)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I do think there should be an emphasis on NCOES as a means to prepare those who are ready to be an NCO and prevent those that are not. Mentorship is something that is spoken but is not understood. I have some good NCOs that know what it means but I have seen many that agree with you on it and do nothing to actually mentor.
(1)
(0)
14
14
0
To be plain & simple about it, this was a short cut CPT (Join to see), to do away with the requirement. I am pleased the requirement has returned and would like to see the SQT/SDT return as well. The SSD's are fine and dandy but they are often an exercise in using "CRTL F". A lack of challenges makes Johnny a Lazy Boy.
(14)
(0)
SSG John Gillespie
That he was. I've had other good 1SGs over the years (not many, sadly) but he was the best. Fair, practical, and an absolutely professional NCO.
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
If you didn't get at least 80 percent on your SQT you didn't get promoted in some of the units I served in.
Yearly CCT testing was good also.
Yearly CCT testing was good also.
(0)
(0)
7
7
0
CPT (Join to see) great subject I think it is required. When I came in I took the SQT and PLDC was mandatory 30 days. Even before that you had School of Standard if you were required to go. It was about hands on and not so much automated as it is nowadays for the next rank. I was under the 1000 point system, in my opinion should come back, with the SQT. Schools should be longer and more MOS specific for current operations.
(7)
(0)
6
6
0
Absolutely, yes. It seems like, at some point, the expectation of NCO's changed from "a leader, and expert in their field" to just "a leader, and we'll leave the technical stuff to Warrants". We should never have stopped verifying technical excellence when it comes to NCO promotions. I think the Army as a whole forgets about Critical Task Lists by MOS, and the inherent expectation that, at each level, you should have already mastered all previous levels, and are mastering your current. We desperately need to get back to that....
(6)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
You are absolutely correct. I have came across the individual critical skills list when I was looking up training on the CAT and was blown away. I doubt many could do half of what is expected of them. For a PL it was four pages long. I gave them to my squad leaders so they knew what they needed to train on instead of come random training that didn't make any sense.
(1)
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
Doctrine is meaningless if people aren't even aware of it, much less enforcing it...
(0)
(0)
CW4 Russ Hamilton (Ret)
Since you brought it up with “leave the technical stuff to Warrants”… Use caution there. The Warrant Officer Corps did away with being “technically and tactically proficient” years ago – that’s my gripe with what has happened to the WO Corps – they are no longer required to be technically proficient. Bad NCO's are being made into bad WO's. WO standards were dropped and the attitude was “they can get technically proficient on the job.” This is not what WO’s were designed for, they were supposed to be the technical experts in their field. In the 70’s and 80’s, when a CW2 said something, it was the way it would be. Not any more for the most part because the standards of experience were lowered to the point it is a joke. This began when the Army stopped direct commissions and more senior NCO’s refused to go through a “worse than boot camp” school (Warrant Officer Candidate School - WOCS) to pin WO1.
Now, too many units sign off on SGTs and SSGs simply because they’re a “good guy” and they press their uniform. WO’s have lost the respect they used to have. Any more, they now have to earn the respect and trust that used to be automatically given because they WERE technically proficient. This is a real sore spot with me but I’ll avoid another rant like my other one in this thread. Regardless, the Soldiers in my command know I won’t sign off on their WO packets just because they’re popular and a sharp dresser. What pisses me off is when they go to another senior WO in the MOS who is outside of our command because they know I won’t sign their letter and the recruiters let them do this.
To be clear though, not all up and coming WO’s are inept and many are ready – the talent pool is out there. There are a lot of good WO’s coming from the NCO Corps but too many are still slipping through the cracks. I’m glad to see that WOCS finally became a leadership school as opposed to a “rite of passage harassment” school like I went to as a SFC. Bottom line: We need to ensure NCO’s are receiving the proper training to be good NCO’s and leaders whether they want to progress through the NCO ranks or go to the WO Corps.
Now, too many units sign off on SGTs and SSGs simply because they’re a “good guy” and they press their uniform. WO’s have lost the respect they used to have. Any more, they now have to earn the respect and trust that used to be automatically given because they WERE technically proficient. This is a real sore spot with me but I’ll avoid another rant like my other one in this thread. Regardless, the Soldiers in my command know I won’t sign off on their WO packets just because they’re popular and a sharp dresser. What pisses me off is when they go to another senior WO in the MOS who is outside of our command because they know I won’t sign their letter and the recruiters let them do this.
To be clear though, not all up and coming WO’s are inept and many are ready – the talent pool is out there. There are a lot of good WO’s coming from the NCO Corps but too many are still slipping through the cracks. I’m glad to see that WOCS finally became a leadership school as opposed to a “rite of passage harassment” school like I went to as a SFC. Bottom line: We need to ensure NCO’s are receiving the proper training to be good NCO’s and leaders whether they want to progress through the NCO ranks or go to the WO Corps.
(2)
(0)
SFC Michael Hasbun
You pretty much nailed my thoughts on the Warrant Corps over the last 15 years... It seemed to me to be transforming from "a Corps of Demonstrated Professionals and experts" to "what you do when you know you're never going to make the SFC list and aren't ready to retire yet/don't want to deal with Soldiers".
It's kinda depressing...
It's kinda depressing...
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
I completed WLC as a SPC. I considered it a rite of passage because I already knew most of the curriculum. Therefore, I did my best to ensure my Soldiers were able to feel the same way when they attended WLC. However, that rite of passage does serve a purpose of proving that knowledge is present. NCOES training serves that purpose, i believe.
(6)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Exactly. I have heard many get little to nothing out of it but they went in with that attitude so it really is what you put into it.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
True. I dare say they probably didn't give 100%. Though I knew a lot of the stuff already, my entire team depended on me to help with th PRT drills.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
When I went through WLC as a specialist I didn't feel that I learned anything I hadn't already known. Maybe it was simple or maybe my leadership had properly prepared me to be a leader. The only thing I felt that was important to me was learning to work with people from different sides of the army. Support MOS's, females and so on. Maybe it is necessary for some people to go so they get the tools to be a successful NCO but definitely not necessary for everyone.
(5)
(0)
SGT William Howell
SGT (Join to see) You were prepared, but what about the people with you? I know when I went there were 5 that were ready and about 30 that were a soup sandwich. I felt the same as you. I did not learn a single thing in WLC other than how to deal with incompetents put into leadership positions and still get the mission done.
Of that 30 shit birds about 20 were ready to be NCOs when we finished WLC. WLC is for those people who's command did not or would not teach a soldier to be a leader. I think we were just the lucky ones to have a command that took an active roll in developing NCOs.
Of that 30 shit birds about 20 were ready to be NCOs when we finished WLC. WLC is for those people who's command did not or would not teach a soldier to be a leader. I think we were just the lucky ones to have a command that took an active roll in developing NCOs.
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
You're correct in your statements. From what I saw everyone I went with was prepared aside from support MOS's who knew nothing about leading a team or squad tactically
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
Sir, it was a huge mistake to promote Soldiers without first sending them to the basic leadership course. Thankfully the Army is going back to the old ways and is requiring Soldiers to have the NCOES completed prior to promoting.
(4)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Are they going to reduce those that don't get to the school house or will they just be grandfathered in¿
(0)
(0)
4
4
0
I think it did have an affect, but I also think the new STEP program (effective 1 October, 2015) is a step in the right direction (pardon the pun). It takes it back to the PLDC roots, where the pin-on is contingent to the school, and not the other way around.
I'm happy to be heading to SLC in about two weeks. Gone are the days of, "wait until you pin on SFC first."
I'm happy to be heading to SLC in about two weeks. Gone are the days of, "wait until you pin on SFC first."
(4)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
That was what was so weird about the whole thing. I was in the process for consideration for separation under the QMP (which I ultimately survived, thank goodness), and randomly got orders to SLC while waiting for my determination. I am not promotable, but I have been a SSG for quite a while.
Everyone I've spoken to who knows much about it says that lately you pretty much have to be promotable to be selected for SLC in the 35 CMF, but I seem to be an anomaly. I think having it complete next year (and SSD-4, if it unlocks in time) will give me one more step ahead in terms of consideration for next year's list.
Everyone I've spoken to who knows much about it says that lately you pretty much have to be promotable to be selected for SLC in the 35 CMF, but I seem to be an anomaly. I think having it complete next year (and SSD-4, if it unlocks in time) will give me one more step ahead in terms of consideration for next year's list.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
As a former NCO, I went to PLDC as a young SPC in 1993. We all took it very seriously because it was a requirement before you could even go to the SGT board. I firmly believe that once these NCOES benchmarks were done away with, the NCO Corps suffered. When you have a young 19 to 20-something Soldier promoted to SGT downrange (we all know what a joke those boards are), he or she only knows combat leadership. While that is obviously important, garrison leadership is different and requires both maturity and institutional knowledge that most junior NCOs simply don't have anymore.
(3)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I was in one of those boards in OIF. I am pretty sure everyone made it. But I had to attend PLDC when I got back or I would be a SPC again. PLDC was not something to take lightly. I don't think WLC is on par with PLDC. I see few that view WLC as something beneficial to their leadership. Either the course is missing it's target or we aren't setting the right expectation for those to go. Either way we are just passing soldiers for some sort of perception that we owe it to them. That is the worst of it all. When a soldier says they deserve to be an NCO or the Army owes them I instantly lose creditability with them. If you have the points and you promotable is one thing but just to think you should be promoted because you think you should is another.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
It was necessary at the time. The ugly truth is that if that requirement hadn't been changed, the Soldiers doing back to back deployments wouldn't have gotten promoted. It was the same reason deployment time was added to the promotion point system years ago and is being removed again.
(3)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Do you think that now we have more home time between rotations that we should return to requiring it again before you are promoted?
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
That's exactly what's happening now. The Army is implementing the STEP program and Soldiers will have to complete NCOES before pinning on rank.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google