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
1
1
0
I became an NCO in '99 at Fort Bragg (1st COSCOM) back when each MACOM had a two-week Junior Leadership Course prior to attending 30 day PLDC and also the 1000 point system. I think that was the greatest thing in the world. JLC was harder so when we got to PLDC, it was a breeze! I'm about to retire after 21 years of service, and I tell you we as an NCO Corps have lost our way from the old days of mentoring and teaching. Everyone wants to make SFC in 7 years yet can't find the motorpool. I came up in a time where if you wanted to make SGT, you told your squad leader you were ready. I also agree with pushing some who are apprehensive yet have the spark, and those who sweat and piss apathy who need to be pushed out!
To be honest I think it was a bad idea to promote before school...it made me hungry to learn and get to the course. These soldiers want entitlement, not hunger!
To be honest I think it was a bad idea to promote before school...it made me hungry to learn and get to the course. These soldiers want entitlement, not hunger!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
The requirement was still there, all that changed was when it was met. But the Army is going back to the school before the promotion. It's my understanding the new SFC lis requires they attend SLC before they pin. However, I believe the POI for NCOES is in desperate need of an overhaul, as they are are still teaching outdated FMs.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I came through the PLDC system, they trained you to lead. You had to know the basis of leadership and gave you the tools, physically and mentally to lead a squad. This course wasn't a bye, you earned graduation. If you couldn't hack it, you got sent back to your unit. It was a much better way to develop an NCO
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I agree. I recall some that weren't that good but they were told the truth. You can't get that from online training.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
YEs taking the resident course away was a bad thing. There are things that you learn in school with an instructor that a BOOK can't teach. If that was the case why don't they let fresh LT's straight outta college run things. There is a reason they are mentored first!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I was attending these NCOES courses during this time of transition. I can tell you that as a Soldier I was taking them less seriously than I was taking the SSD courses. It didn't have much to do with the curriculum, but with the Cadre. They lost their credibility with me, and a majority of my classmates, almost instantly because they clearly did not know the curriculum they were teaching. These SGLs didn't care about what they were doing there, and it was abundantly clear to the student body that they were Cadre because they were non-deployable, or they were "swept under the rug" by their branches to get them out of a position where they could get people hurt. Combine this with the need for growth from within of the NCO corps, where promotions came fast, faster than NCOES could handle. NCOES could not keep up with the needs of the Army, especially with any desirable NCO leadership being pulled to deploying units. Effectively putting us in our current predicament with jaded NCOs who do not respect the NCOES system because of our own experience.
(1)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
That is what usually happens. I wish they would just discharge them. I just got back from OIF I when I went to my NCOES school. Our SGL was much the same way. We pretty much bullied him around. A lot of were SGTs due to being Iraq when promoted and all of us had more combat time then he did. So when he tried to tell us how to be an NCO in combat we knew he didn't know exactly what he was talking about. He was very unprofessional also. There were two female soldiers that seemed to get more attention and assistance then the others. It balanced out at the then. When I was class leader I made them do every detail. They were the only two that didn't deploy. It might have not been fair but it was how it went.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
I have no issues with NCOES being required, if anything it ensures NCOs are competitive with their peers before they are promoted. What as I see as an issue, is commands not supporting their soldiers attending these schools. I believe there was an article in the ArmyTimes saying the same thing a week or two ago (can't find it right now). This may be more of a problem in Joint Commands, where the other services don't understand Army requirements, but if that's the case we need to stop assigning junior NCOs to these commands.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
I believe they should have to go through each NCOES to make the next rank. I went through PLDC and BNCOC(19Kilo). I was pretty knowledgeable already of what to expect thanks to my Sergeants in my Unit. But, there were some little things those schools helped me perfect as a leader and Tank Commander. That is why they should have to attend them before earning their stripes.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
You can change the acronym...officers have to do something with their time...as long as you provide the training leaders need to develop their professional skills. Was there ever a difference between PNCOC, PLDC, and WLC? Probably not when you boil it down?
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
PNCOC was for non combat armes MOSs, it was more technical IE job related. PLDC combat arms, that changed in the early 80s PNCOC went away and everyone went to PLDC a 4 week live in course on Basic leadership. in the mid 80s PLDC became mandatory to pin SGT. WLC ...that happened after i retired in 02.
(0)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
SFC (Join to see)
Thank you. I was aware of this. Initially, everyone attended PNCOC, then they added PLDC for the non-combat MOS...because as we have seen in the last decade non-combat MOS are never involved in combat (sarcasm intended). I think that someone realized that PNCOC and PLDC were actually still the same thing, and if it wasn't, is should be so they combined the course work...and since someone young officer had spent a lot of time creating the acronym PLDC.
Now we call it WLC but it is still the Initial Leadership Course...I would be surprised if there was any real difference in the actual training between PNCOC/PLDC/WLC.
Thank you. I was aware of this. Initially, everyone attended PNCOC, then they added PLDC for the non-combat MOS...because as we have seen in the last decade non-combat MOS are never involved in combat (sarcasm intended). I think that someone realized that PNCOC and PLDC were actually still the same thing, and if it wasn't, is should be so they combined the course work...and since someone young officer had spent a lot of time creating the acronym PLDC.
Now we call it WLC but it is still the Initial Leadership Course...I would be surprised if there was any real difference in the actual training between PNCOC/PLDC/WLC.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google