Posted on Apr 20, 2014
What do you think of these requirements for promotion to Sergeant (E-5)?
35.8K
238
89
4
2
2
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?<div><br></div><div>In order to be promoted to E5 you should have:<br></div><div><div>- Completed SSD1<br></div><div>- Graduated from WLC</div><div>- Have a minimum of 70% in each event on APFT for 2 consecutive times </div><div>- Weapon qualified at 32 and above 2 consecutive times</div><div>- Attended as minimum soldier of the quarter on a BN or higher level and won. </div></div>
Promotion Board
Promotions
Military Career
Career Advice
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 50
81
81
0
OK, all great things.....BUT....why is it that no one cares about KNOWING YOUR FREAKING JOB!!!! No one seems to care about being 'tactically and technically profecient' anymore....all everyone cares about is making slides look better through PT and weapons scores....we need to change!
(81)
(0)
CW3 (Join to see)
SQT for E5 - E7, in addition to passing APFT and completing schools commensurate with their rank. The SQT needs to come back to the Army.
(4)
(0)
SFC Michael Faircloth
SGT Frasher that totally depends on your job. What if you were a Master Fitness Instructor, wouldn't physical fitness be the defining characteristic of his job?
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
A promotion tests a persons ability to present themselves and retain knowledge, it does not test ones ability to do his/her job proficiently. while it is important for certain MOS's to concentrate on tactical proficiency, it is less important for others who will not see combat. The promotion system should be geared towards the MOS not a general Army standard
(2)
(0)
SFC Timothy Dutcher
How about chain of commands only recommend soldiers deemed worthy of promotion and quit giving the system worthless joes who think being sotm validates anything but a good month. Do your job, do it well, accept leadership opportunities, and take advantage of every opportunity to maximize points. Then when your time comes, you have done everything you can to meet the standard. Btw, I maxed e-5 and e-6 points in my day, in the infantry, no less, so it can be done. Even with limited time to commit. The points included maxing pt, expert marksmanship, and those other factors anyways. I would say the process would be cheapened with those being the only requirements.
(0)
(0)
18
18
0
I have to ask, what if the unit went to a range once in 12 months and the Soldier scores 32. What if that same unit schedules another range but the Soldier has to miss it because he is acting NCOIC for his shop and can't miss the QTB? <div><br></div><div>What if a Soldier slipped a disk in his back while helping to lift a PLS tire and now can't score a 70% in sit ups but excels in all other categories? </div><div><br></div><div>It sounds great as a guide but to REQUIRE all of these categories be met prior to promotion could exclude a lot of fine leaders from earning their stripes. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div>
(18)
(0)
SSG V. Michelle Woods
Worded perfectly SSG Barrish. A lot of an NCOs' leadership has to be polished when they're actually in a leadership position. That's why it's important for NCOs to truly assess the performance AND potential of a Soldier before sending them off to the board.
(2)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
SPC - For a guy working in linguistics you sure spell a lot of words incorrectly. As far as these standards I sense of a backdoor attempt at causing strife for those who may lack in any of those areas or have mitigating circumstances. This is a similar comparison to NFL football and 40/times. Some are fast in track but not as much with pads and helmets.
(8)
(0)
9
9
0
Okay I'm going to scream here. These requirements are beyond the standing standards; and while I agree you should never settle for bare minimum you cannot keep a Soldier from continuing his/her career if he/she meets those requirements. If the requirement is to PASS the PT test and a Soldier does that with a 190 or whatever then they are good. If the requirement is to qualify on your primary weapon system and you do that with a 24 out of 40; then you are good. If the requirement is to pass the promotion board and you do that; then you are good.<div><br></div><div> I don't understand what some people here are thinking and this is by no means a knock on this up and coming leading out of Ft Gordon. People talk about PT scores as they are the end all be all of what makes you a good Soldier and time and time again, it is said they aren't. What about knowing your job?! What about demonstrating potential leadership skills? What about demonstrating the ability to remain calm under fire or to show the ability to make the right decision when facing a difficult call? Where are those on this list. What in the name of Audie Murphy does winning a SOQ board have to do with keeping someone from pinning on your E5. SPC F have you achieved these requirements? If so awesome but take a second and look to your left and look to your right. The standards are the standards and while they stand a Soldier cannot be held back because he/she didn't win the SOQ board or whatever other crazy requirement people can think of next. Heck, why not make one of the requirements that you have to have been deployed with a certain unit in a certain area and been on a certain mission because to me, that is in line with these requirements. </div><div><br></div><div>As stated below, some Reserve and National Guard units don't go to the range but once a year and as one that would get close to the same score every time I went to the range, I would have a bad day and miss one or two targets. So yeah lets hold someone at E4(P) for an extra year because the unit went to the range and the service member who scored 32 last year pulled the trigger on the 100 meter pop up and left the range with a 31. </div><div><br></div><div>Okay, jumping off my soap box now.</div>
(9)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SGT,
You just make my question more relevant, that basically saying that there are too many un justified promotions to the SGT rank.
The weakness of western society in the last generation is being displayed proudly. Everyone think that they can/deserve to be in a leadership position – BS!!!
This day there is no more natural selection process; everyone live in a mindset of self entitlement….everyone want a medal for coming to work and do the minimum required
(0)
(0)
SGT Ben Keen
I am by no means saying anyone deserves the privilege of wearing 3 chevrons and holding the title of Sergeant. The rank of Sergeant is one of the most, some might argue the most, important leadership rank in the military. It is where you cut your teeth; develop your leadership style; learn how to manage not just the Soldiers in your charge but also the millions of dollars of equipment. To be a Sergeant is, as stated just seconds ago, a privilege. You are the senior leaders' eyes and hands on the line. You are that young Soldiers main point of contact for anything that they might encounter. You are where the rubber meets the road. So while I agree that no one is entitled to holding a leadership position; my rebuttal to your original post still stands. <div><br></div><div>Look again at what you posted. Have you met those requirements? What about some of the points raised about the weapons qualification? What about those Soldiers, who may be demonstrating great leadership potential within his/her unit but because of the training schedule will not get a chance to qualify again until next year? Winning a SOM or SOQ board would mean that a promotion board would have 1 maybe 2 Soldiers stand in-front of them a month. And really what does a SOM or SOQ board tell you about a Soldiers leadership potential? Just about the same as their PT score. And while on that soapbox yet again, the standard is 60 points in each event. That's it....that's the list...60 points. You think it should be higher...great...I think I should be taller but that isn't happening anytime soon either. Yes Soldiers should be encouraged to achieve the best score possible on the APFT and Weapons qualification but the standard in those events are set.</div><div><br></div><div>I think the real issue may be that there is no true way to determine how good of a leader SPC Joe Snuffy or even better SPC Ben Keen would be. The ability to answer questions with memorized or to score 299 on your PT test or hit 38 out of 40 targets or whatever other benchmark you want to put out there does not give you a clear sign of how SPC Joe Snuffy or SPC Ben Keen would carry our their duty. All senior leaders can really do is help mentor the young up and coming leader; teach them the leasons they will need and hold them to the standards as printed in the ARs, FMs, TMs, DAPAMs, and other policies. </div>
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google