What do you think of the Navy's new policy of separation for sailors who can't deploy for a year?

Lt Col Charlie Brown — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:12:08 -0400

This came from the American Legion e-newsletter

Response by CW5 Jack Cardwell made Sep 27 at 2018 6:15 PM

CW5 Jack Cardwell — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:15:02 -0400

I have seen many non deployable personnel who bragged about it, they should definitely go !

Response by Lt Col Charlie Brown made Sep 27 at 2018 6:15 PM

Lt Col Charlie Brown — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:15:05 -0400

Response by CPO Tim Dickey made Sep 27 at 2018 6:18 PM

CPO Tim Dickey — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:18:06 -0400

What?! That's interesting Lt Col Charlie Brown

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 27 at 2018 6:44 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:44:36 -0400

Is there an exemption for pregnancy and some time after the birth? If the woman needs a c section it could end up being over a year total time

Response by Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen made Sep 27 at 2018 6:57 PM

Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:57:02 -0400

If you can't do all aspects of your job you need to go, period!

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 27 at 2018 6:59 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 18:59:16 -0400

I believe there are two major reasons for this policy. The first reason is obvious and can be stated publicy: dependable manpower. The second is equally obvious, but cannot be made public for equally obvious reasons. Cryptic, perhaps. Politically expedient, you'd better believe it. If you're IQ is north of 1, you'll be able to guess the issue.

Response by LT Brad McInnis made Sep 27 at 2018 7:13 PM

LT Brad McInnis — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 19:13:48 -0400

Sailors go to sea... those that don't are either Army or Air Force.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 27 at 2018 7:47 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 19:47:43 -0400

Lt Col Charlie Brown I don't think any of the services can afford to keep personnel that are unable to perform their wartime mission/duty. The Navy may be leading this, but I would wager that the others will be implementing similar programs soon as well.

Response by CWO3 Dennis M. made Sep 27 at 2018 7:47 PM

CWO3 Dennis M. — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 19:47:44 -0400

Ships go to sea, sailors man ships, the Navy has a mission to protect from the sea and thus sailors all must go to sea, without sailors they can't complete their mission! If you can't go to sea, you do not belong in the Navy.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 27 at 2018 8:13 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 20:13:06 -0400

Before the Army started cracking down on this issue, Soldiers we’re trying to be non-deployable. This is a huge and unnecessary burden on operational units and the Soldiers that serve in them!

I personally believe that if someone is injured in combat so badly that they can’t deploy, but choose to continue their service, they should be allowed to stay in. I support them having to change their MOS, if it’s best for the Army, but they shouldn’t be forced out.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Sep 27 at 2018 8:28 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 20:28:18 -0400

The Army's already been using this idea. I definitely see the merits in it, but along with other "spur of the moment" decisions, who it affects will dictate how long this lasts. If the Navy begins to see a major drop in a certain rating or MOS, it'll be suddenly exempt from the list. I'm going to wit and see how far up the rank chain this will affect also. It gets rather interesting once senior officers or Master Chiefs are having their heels nipped over the rule.

If the job requires you to roll out, then you should be able to roll out when told/vouluntold, and be an asset to the team. Your rank or who you know in DC (Pentagon or Navy Yard for ex), shouldn't get you a free ticket out of it.

Response by Sgt John Steinmeier made Sep 27 at 2018 9:10 PM

Sgt John Steinmeier — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 21:10:04 -0400

Mattis set the basic policy for ALL branches earlier this year. The military is becoming a war fighting institution again under this administration instead of a social experiment as it was under the previous.

Response by Maj Marty Hogan made Sep 27 at 2018 9:17 PM

Maj Marty Hogan — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 21:17:35 -0400

The job is to go where needed. As the MAO I saw a lot of malingering. It does depend on long term prognosis, but when you can retire in 20 years and miss an entire year not doing your intended duty...well then it becomes a hard call. You place an extra burden on those that never have issues.

Response by SN Greg Wright made Sep 27 at 2018 9:55 PM

SN Greg Wright — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 21:55:49 -0400

Non-deployable Sailors should be called Soldiers or Airmen. Not Marines. Marines go to sea.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 27 at 2018 10:42 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 22:42:29 -0400

No different than in the active or Reserve component. If you can't pass physical fitness, you don't make height and weight, you don't get all your physical and medical Readiness out of the way, you are non- deployable and subject to separation. No difference really between the branches of the military!

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Sep 27 at 2018 10:47 PM

SGM Bill Frazer — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 22:47:50 -0400

The army is already taking that step. My Regiments have between 5-6 deployments since my retirement in 95. I have met some troops who have 8 deployments- 9 months to 1 yr each time. They are being burnt out, yet we have some folks/units who have not deployed a single time yet.

Response by SMSgt Thor Merich made Sep 27 at 2018 11:00 PM

SMSgt Thor Merich — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 23:00:53 -0400

The Air Force is doing a similar thing. Everyone (even Reserves) must be able to deploy. However, there are many waivers.

Response by CSM Charles Hayden made Sep 27 at 2018 11:03 PM

CSM Charles Hayden — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 23:03:44 -0400

Lt Col Charlie Brown If you can’t sail, why be a Sailor?

Response by LtCol Robert Quinter made Sep 27 at 2018 11:11 PM

LtCol Robert Quinter — Thu, 27 Sep 2018 23:11:57 -0400

You know the story Colonel. If I'm non deployable, someone else has to fill the need for my specialty deployed. The non deployable sits home while someone else is facing a faster turn around.
I was surprised to see it classified as a new policy, we used to do admins on such personnel all the time.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2018 2:20 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 02:20:22 -0400

I had no ida it was a policy. But if you are non deployable within a month, get out! Don’t waste tax payer dollars and get out on your own!
The military is meant to fight and win our nation’s wars! If you can’t deploy, just get out!

Response by CW3 Michael Bodnar made Sep 28 at 2018 8:23 AM

CW3 Michael Bodnar — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 08:23:00 -0400

I think by all means that if you're unable to deploy in any service (whether you are willing or not), you career choice needs to be addressed. I do believe however this needs to be handled in a case by case basis. If you have someone that cannot medically deploy and has almost reached retirement, then consider having that person stay in. Can that person still perform their duties in another setting? Stuff like this really needs to be looked at carefully as we need to start thinking about the military long term and how we're going to fill our ranks.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2018 10:13 AM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 10:13:01 -0400

Generally if you can’t deploy, you’re useless to the service. However, if there is a short-term issue, then waive it for that short term and then deploy them. They’re taking up space and breathing air someone else could fill. Additionally, they’re BFing their team mates.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2018 4:07 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:07:20 -0400

You must be mission capable IOT be in the military. Concerning a pregnancy. If the pregnancy occurs after SM being notified of deployment, the SM made them self NMC and hurt the team and should be able to complete the contract they are currently under yet barred from promotion and continued service. The purpose of the military is to defend the Country and Constitution and fight the battles of the wars we are engaged in. It is not for the SM to decide when and where they go. They are assigned to a team and IOT be a productive team member you SHALL SADDLE UP when you are called. IF not, depart from us so they we can get someone who can and will.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2018 4:08 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:08:32 -0400

The Army is adopting the same mentality. Our job is to be ready to deploy and fight and win the nation's wars. We can't do that if we are non-deployable. I understand there are different cases out there and applaud the military for looking at each case. If you can't deploy and you don't have a valid reason then the military isn't for you.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2018 4:18 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 16:18:32 -0400

For those of you saying it is unrealistic, I hope you have exited the service or soon will do so. I've gone, am going and will continue to keep myself physically fit IOT be able to go when called upon until I exit. Lead, Follow or get out of the way.

Response by SCPO William Akin made Oct 3 at 2018 1:42 PM

SCPO William Akin — Wed, 03 Oct 2018 13:42:37 -0400

Sailors belong on ships, Ships belong at SEA!!!
Get some blue under your ass or get out..
End of discussion..

Response by CWO4 Gene A. made Oct 4 at 2018 6:46 PM

CWO4 Gene A. — Thu, 04 Oct 2018 18:46:48 -0400

C'mon, you joined, you serve, you deploy as required. You are serving your country. At least that is what you should be doing. Where is the warrior ethos? You signed up, now do your duty.