What do you think of these requirements for promotion to Sergeant (E-5)?

2014-04-20T14:58:11-04:00

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>

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2014 3:18 PM

2014-04-20T15:18:04-04:00

Yes I agree, but not completely, some of the scores for shooting maybe changed and the board is just about remembering stuff. I have seen great Soldiers that would be outstanding Junior NCO's, but they cant perform on boards. But yes for the most part I would agree with your statement!

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Apr 20 at 2014 3:25 PM

2014-04-20T15:25:02-04:00

Disagree...Soldiers aren't promoted to E5, but SGT.

Other than the pay grade piece, I'd personally have no issue with this...but would it be an Army standard or unit standard?

Response by CW2 Joseph Evans made Apr 20 at 2014 3:25 PM

2014-04-20T15:25:18-04:00

Is that a requirement for everyone in your BN? How often are "exceptions" granted? I might disagree with the "won" part of attending a SoM board, but all of those requirements are valid under current OPTEMPO/PERSTEMPO.

Response by MSgt Keith Hebert made Apr 20 at 2014 3:28 PM

2014-04-20T15:28:32-04:00

Sorry one standard is all you need.
Special schools(sf,di,etc. can have higher standards)
But having two standards one for lower and one for NCO's would be confusing and convey the fact that pt,technical profiency makes a leader, which it does not

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2014 3:29 PM

2014-04-20T15:29:24-04:00

Sounds awesome, minus the "winning" of the board as opposed to having attended (and done well).

Response by SSG V. Michelle Woods made Apr 20 at 2014 6:38 PM

2014-04-20T18:38:29-04:00

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>

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2014 7:16 PM

2014-04-20T19:16:25-04:00

I agree to most of that. I am not a big believer in the APFT. It is good for measuring if you are fit, but not the most accurate. Some people maybe runners and be able to crank out situps and the 2-mile, but only get 65 points in the pushups. I have seen people that are very able to conduct aerobic activity, but are not runners, or are short distance (400m or less) runners. It's hard to use a flawed test for the basis of promotion.

I have seem some people stating having a standard for all, but certain groups have different standards. I am more on the thought that an MOS should determine the standards. If you are a sniper, your shooting may be more important than fitness. If you are dismounted, fitness is likely more important than shooting.

The standards listed above seem great for 11 series, but not sure about why a 35, 25, 74, or 92 series would need to meet to promote. Some MOSs would have no NCOs if this were implemented across the board.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2014 9:39 PM

2014-04-20T21:39:50-04:00

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!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 20 at 2014 10:28 PM

2014-04-20T22:28:31-04:00

Good ideas that are something to be considered to respond to what Leaders need to push for but not mandate. But as one pointed out, boards often get fixated on memorizing study guides and tactics. I would like to see more geared towards knowing their MOS. You can't or will struggle to lead a squad or platoon if you don't know your job. It would be hard to board but something to push for. Especially on the low density side where more knowledge is needed to function properly.

Response by SSG William Sutter made Apr 21 at 2014 1:16 AM

2014-04-21T01:16:10-04:00

This will not happen. SSD1 and WLC I agree with. You can't hold someone back from meeting the Army Standard of 60 points in each category on the APFT and the Army Standard being met on weapons qual as well.

Response by WO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 2:00 AM

2014-04-21T02:00:10-04:00

I'd be on board for the top 4 as requirements to STAY an NCO. I think that's something the Army lacks, enforceable standards to maintain the rank once achieved.

Response by SSG Shawn M. made Apr 21 at 2014 3:21 AM

2014-04-21T03:21:27-04:00

I agree with everything except win BN level or higher soldier of the quarter board. There is only one winner every 3 months per BN. So out of the whole BN only one soldier per 3 months would get promoted to E5.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 11:30 AM

2014-04-21T11:30:20-04:00

I understand what your trying to do, but you really can't measure leadership ability, because it's intangable. Leadership is observed and if those above you feel that you can be on their level based on your capacity then, in my opinion, you should be promoted.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 12:00 PM

2014-04-21T12:00:53-04:00

Bottom Line...I disagree with your statement. But, I agree with the concept. You must remember that promotion first begins with the recommendation.
The Army has its minimum standards for a recommendation to promotion and within those standards is the Commander's recommendation. Who does the Commander get their recommendation from...of course, the 1SG and PSGs.
How do you get your 1SG's, PSGs and thus your Commander's recommendation...various answers, but this is where the concept recommended is enacted. A Commander may based on their type of unit establish standards to earn their recommendation for promotion.

My recommendation for Unit Leadership to consider for promotion recommendations:
For recommendation and promotion to SGT:
o teach -2O level tasks to the squad verified by SL using STP/CTT
o complete MOS APPD
o complete SSD1
o participate in the Company Soldier of the Month Board (1SG required recommendation)
o display maintenance or improvement of APFT (also lead SQD/PLT PT)

For SSG:
o teach -3O level tasks to the PLT verified by PSG using STP/CTT
o 25% of subordinates must be promotable
o complete SSD2
o complete Supervisor's Development Course (APPD)
o possess enough distance education credit to max promotion points
o participate in the Company NCO of the Month Board (1SG required recommendation)
o display maintenance or improvement of APFT (also lead PLT/CO PT)

There is always someone gaming the system once you provide transparency to how you operate. With my 1SGs support, and once I briefed the Company on what it would take to earn my recommendation. I had some unhappy NCOs initially, but as they bought into the effort, we produced some good NCOs who are still producing good NCOs into the NCO Corps. Zero IG complaints because I believe the requirements spell out success or something you should already be doing to improve yourself as an NCO. Remember, we are looking for constant improvement, not perfection.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 12:04 PM

2014-04-21T12:04:06-04:00

Why can't we leave the reg's the way they are and charge the NCOs that recommend these soldiers with making sure a SPC is ready for the next level and if they are not then don't recommend them. I haven't had tons of SPC working for me over the years but I only have recommended one of them for the SGT board. mainly because most were not ready, but because my name is on that soldier who I recommend. I know them inside and out and I know that regardless of their board performance if they will be a good SGT or not. I don't know why the army just doesn't hold the SSGs and above to a higher standard for recommending these soldiers.

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Apr 21 at 2014 1:44 PM

2014-04-21T13:44:43-04:00

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>

Response by SFC Stephen P. made Apr 21 at 2014 1:55 PM

2014-04-21T13:55:17-04:00

APFT is scored with points, not percentage. Soldiers on valid profiles can be excused from events, or take alternate events where no points are awarded.

Not all units have weapons and therefore do not do weapon qualification. Last I checked, there were only 30 targets for pistol qualification.

With your board requirement, each BN would be limited to 4 SGT promotions per year. This is hardly sufficient to staff the NCO ranks in the Army.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 4:20 PM

2014-04-21T16:20:20-04:00

I agree with all of the above except the soldier of the quarter one, however I feel that its more important that they know their job and has the capacity to lead soldiers. WLC is designed for everyone to pass. Ask you have to do is follow the excessive rules and as far as the board goes if you study hard and are confident it's too easy. Granted I have been to neither and do not mean to speak out of place but that is what I have seen from my experience. I feel that focus should be more on how well the soldier serves in his mos. There are too many NCOs who dint have enough experience in their field and are forced to learn quickly. While this may be good for the NCO to learn to adapt and overcome, it has a negative impact on the readiness if the unit. Maybe only a small one but still a potential hazard.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 4:34 PM

2014-04-21T16:34:18-04:00

<p>-Yes. This is a reasonable requirement, in line with other NCOES requirements.</p><p>-Yes. Same as reason one.</p><p>-No. The APFT required score is 180 or above. While I think those that consistently perform well above the standard deserve recognition, this should not be a requirement for promotion.</p><p>-No. This is above the needed score. </p><p>-No. This is not possible for all Soldiers.</p>

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 7:25 PM

2014-04-21T19:25:37-04:00

The problem with good ideas is that they sound great until you have to implement them. Familiar with TRIPS?

-WLC was once a requirement for SGT that was pulled when deployment constraints made it impossible to maintain. Chances are, the Army will institute it again at a later date.

-Many units outside of FORSCOM just are not able to qualify twice a year. I spent 3 years at RTB and didn't get a chance to qualify until we built our own range.

-As for a Soldier of the quarter board, the numbers just don't add up. A single battalion would only have 1 eligible soldier every 3 months. 4 SGT's a year.

I think a better option would be to go to MOS testing like our sister services use, and that were once used in the Army. This way, if I have a medic who comes to me from a unit where he wasn't performing medical duties, I would know he has a base of knowledge that I could expect every SGT to have. Even that would be difficult to institute. It would require a massive amount of testing personnel and new testing facilities.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 7:30 PM

2014-04-21T19:30:37-04:00

I agree with all of the following except the last one. Winning boards doesn't make you a leader it proves you can retain what you have read which is a great attribute for a leader, but can you apply it when it counts. I would replace that with must have held a leadership position for 6mo or more; which would be a better measurement of leadership skills and ability then winning a board.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 21 at 2014 9:38 PM

2014-04-21T21:38:18-04:00

The obvious personal responsibility of being a proactive soldier must remain, APFT, SSD1 etc. However effectively being able to "Lead" soldiers is a task that many can struggle with. So get their first taste of a little power and authority and run with it in sometimes a very unproductive manner.
If a soldier is getting promoted all of the above should in fact be taken into consideration when determining ones ability to lead by example. However in my opinion more importantly is being able to identify with their subordinates and to become that tool others use to become a better soldier. I have seen many NCOs expend more energy to prove a point or reprimand a soldier than help, mentor, and or coach a soldier. With that said, in my opinion its more about leading that many of the formalities of boards, physical fitness scores, and weapons qual. Not to say those are not important, but I have ran across some NCOs that still do the bare minimum in the way of training, mentoring, and coaching our future leaders!

Response by SPC Daniel Edwards made Apr 22 at 2014 10:27 AM

2014-04-22T10:27:51-04:00

Passing a board: I have seen shit-bag soldiers bullshit their way thru boards. I have seen true natural leaders do everything right and still get screwed because they dont play the suck up game. I had a guy in my last unit who was a pt stud and aced the board the first time but had to go back two more times because the CSM thought he was bullshitting (the CSM was a douche of an asshole anyways but that is another story). The point is the board is pointless. Promotion should be done on merit, not "looking the part."

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 23 at 2014 6:37 PM

2014-04-23T18:37:16-04:00

SPC(P) Funt,

What about technical competence? We must know our job as a force.

V/r
CW3 Jones

Response by SGT Brian Watkins made Apr 23 at 2014 6:39 PM

2014-04-23T18:39:50-04:00

Tell you what, having NCO's that know dick about their jobs and only getting promoted on the buddy system is a pain in the ass. I have seen a lot of really smart guys get out of the Army while in the E-4 Mafia. Not because they couldn't make points, because the point system is very easy to max, but because the NCO's, politics, and senior level BS of Army life made them sick of it all. So what do the good ones do? They get out, either finish school or get a higher paying job, leaving the Army stuck with it's thumb up it's rear with only a few good NCO's left to lead. The Army does not teach it's junior enlisted leadership roles early enough. Specialists aka Shamurai Warriors... well, you can't hate on them because we all know the code of the E-4, my point is leadership roles are not taught, and no one E-1 through E-4 is going to render proper courtesy to the next highest rank. I saw a Marine Cpl tear into a Lance Cpl... and the Lance actually took it! It was nuts by Army standards of conduct but it happened... the CPL really is an NCO. Now let me see an Army Spec4 or CPL try to tear into a PFC... doesn't happen, and has to be escalated to the next Sgt or above for results... if they aren't already throwing blows.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Apr 24 at 2014 1:18 AM

2014-04-24T01:18:39-04:00

In the Army we promoted soldiers who we see to have potential to take on greater responsibilities such a being promoted to Sergeant (E5), but we need to take careful consideration. How do we do see the potential? I see potential by a soldier doing certain things or task such a earning a high number promotion points from Skillport classes, taking a few college classes, volunteering to lead PT, volunteering to be in charge of simple taskings assigned to the platoon.

In addition, if I see potential in a Specialist and if I want to evaluate him or her further, I will request that Specialist to be a Team Leader under my leadership. A Team Leader has a minimum of one or two soldiers. The Team Leader is responsible for his or soldiers well being, their physical and mental health, their living conditions, and their professional growth. It is my responsibility to guide that new Team Leader in all of those areas. By that point, that Specialist should know the ends and outs of their job. Since I am an MP, I expect that new Team Leader to know at least the job of a driver, gunner and as a patrol officer (police officer stuff). That new Team Leader will be responsible to teach those skills to his soldiers and not only teach but communicate effectively verbally and on paper.

The afore mentioned is not the be all or end all to be considered to be promoted to Sergeant however, if that Specialist exhibits most or all that I mentioned, that is what I consider potential and of course meet the standard for all applicable standards such as PT and weapons.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made Apr 24 at 2014 1:49 AM

2014-04-24T01:49:21-04:00

In order to be promoted to E5 you should have:

- Completed SSD1

- Graduated from WLC

- Have a minimum of 70% in each event on APFT for 2 consecutive times

- Weapon qualified at 32 and above 2 consecutive times

- Attended as minimum soldier of the quarter on a BN or higher level and won.

I am glad someone is brain storming ideas, but the above tells me nothing on whether or not that Specialist knows how to lead soldiers. When I give my Specialist Team Leaders a task and he or she is given soldiers I tell them, "You will instruct, you will give orders, you will supervise" and most of these tasks involve doing something in the motor pool or prepping for a mission or other tasks.

Response by Cadet 1st CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 26 at 2014 9:28 AM

2014-04-26T09:28:18-04:00

agree

Response by SGT Suraj Dave made Apr 26 at 2014 10:02 AM

2014-04-26T10:02:23-04:00

SSD1 is nothing but an NCOER bullet. One soldier in the squad does it, passes off the answers to the others. No one actually reads it or learns anything. Its a check the block type deal. Your NCO makes you do it so he/she can get the bullet.

Never went to WLC, I learned how to be an NCO through observing the best NCO's and being mentored by them. I learned how to counsel and lead formations from observing NCO's doing it for the 3 years I was lower enlisted. WLC is necessary, but WLC slots were tough to come by. You have all these SGT's and CPL's who take precedence over you to go to WLC, meaning you can be waiting for a very long time to go to WLC. Never went to WLC, still ended up with a 1-1 NCOER. WLC is and should be necessary but there just aren't enough slots to go around.

As for boards, I was awesome at them. I am great at memorizing random trivia. I won some boards, and as a result my soldiers always won.... but the board is just random trivia knowledge really. I can answer you every single land nav question from the Army Study Guide (which I know they no longer us) but in reality I had no clue how to do actual land nav. The fact your NCO's believe your ready to be recommended should be enough. Those NCO's observe you daily, they know your work ethic. They should have the ultimate judgment based on your performance, not your SGM and a bunch of other 1SG's on a board asking you trivia questions who don't really know who you are.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2014 1:04 AM

2014-05-12T01:04:05-04:00

Except for the first two criteria, I disagree. The EPS already takes your PT score and IWQ score into account. There are minimum scores in place for a reason. The SOTQ board requirement is just plain dumb, because that leaves too few soldiers in the promotion pool.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 24 at 2014 9:24 AM

2014-06-24T09:24:52-04:00

All of those things are basic Soldier tasks. You already have to complete SSD1 before promotion. To be boarded for Soldier of the QTR at least once can be difficult to accomplish. Especially in larger units such as Infantry Battalions where the number of E4 and below are too great to ensure that all E4s get a shot to compete on such a board. Also, none of those are indicators of Leadership potential other than the 1059 you get from WLC. But not even that guarantees that the SGL at the course made good or accurate observations and then documented them. Being willing and able to share MOS/Job knowledge with those in your section and putting team before self however, ARE indicators of Leadership potential. Being able to do basic Soldier functions is everyone's job. Being able to help improve performance of a section through MOS mentorship is not. AND that is what we need more of if junior Soldiers are to become NCOs.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 24 at 2014 9:39 AM

2014-06-24T09:39:16-04:00

Is that your opinion or is that a set of standards set by your unit?

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 24 at 2014 5:13 PM

2014-06-24T17:13:39-04:00

Know the TLPs and their MOS! They should be strong in Leadership!

Response by SGT Bobby F. made Jun 26 at 2014 5:14 AM

2014-06-26T05:14:11-04:00

I think all of that would be fantastic, if the primary requirement was passing a form of SQT. I know before my time there was a Skills Qualification Test. I can think of no legitimate reason the SQT relative to MOS should not be a part of the promotion process. Speaking as someone in the lower enlisted ranks, I follow knowledge and experience, not just random 300 APFT #47.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jul 2 at 2014 1:21 PM

2014-07-02T13:21:31-04:00

None of those criteria really demonstrates an ability to LEAD. An E-5 is a leader first and foremost. True a junior one, but still a leader. I'd rather have requirements that shows they have demonstrated competency in not only soldier skills, but leadership skills as well.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 20 at 2014 3:02 AM

2014-08-20T03:02:31-04:00

In the National Guard the requirements are similar but really different we get promotion packets that are filled out by the Admin NCO which includes points based on reviews from our leaders, awards, PT, weapons qual, awards, schools, and a couple other things. The reviews have two categories which are ability and potential and the NCO writes and number down in each subcategory in both columns 1 through what ever number stated on the side and it varies then all three leaders evals are averaged and max points you can get it approx 500 then the rest is from the other things stated with a max off 1000 points I believe then the SPC will sign and date and choose a area the wish to be promoted within. The whole thing about this system is that the rewiews arent always based on ability two guys in my unit I know for sure theirs wasnt because they still dont know what they are doing well it was based on how much ass they kisses thats just how it is usually till none of the brown nosers are left then the SPC that deserve it get the highers scores. Now as far as WLC you have one year from the date of promotion to go but battalion wants a pt test of 70% or higher before they will approve the school and SSD 1 is also required but your name still goes on the list you just wont get a call to be asked about promotion till you complete it. Im at 8 years of service by the end of the month and 5 years of it at the rank of SPC till I finally got promoted 2 months ago so from what I can tell is that whether its AD or NG the promotion system to E-5 is jacked up and needs to be altered

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Aug 20 at 2014 3:09 AM

2014-08-20T03:09:04-04:00

You were on track but lost me at winning the board. That will create a bottleneck. We used to have to test for our MOS (SQT) waaaaay back in the day and I liked it. The Air Force tests like a big dog and I think that needs to return.

Response by SGT Richard H. made Aug 20 at 2014 1:49 PM

2014-08-20T13:49:40-04:00

I like most of them, and would add bringing back SQT....but these can't be the only requirements. Also, in a Combat arms unit you'd better not be scoring a 210 on your APFT, let alone expect to be promoted. Every Infantry unit I served in had an unwritten requirement of maintaining a 270 or you'd never see a board.

The last one is the one that throws me the most. There are only four BN soldier of the quarter winners per year/per Battalion, meaning it's only possible for 4 out of over 700+ soldiers per year to make SGT. Serious bottleneck.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 10 at 2015 2:31 AM

2015-01-10T02:31:25-05:00

I neither agree or disagree. Anyone can click, click, click thru ssd's and correspondance courses. Wlc is a school for e5's. Not a requirement to get promoted to e5. Granted it gives you a good majority of promotion points. Its so an e5 can go to alc to get their e6 and so on with slc for e7. Same with pt score. Passing is 60% in each event. Doesnt mean you shouldnt push yourself. Often times if you do well at pt or weapons qual. tho your more likely to be favored above another sm. Sounds more like unit reqirements to go to promotion board. But what about job profiency? You have to know your job to be able to lead others. My 2 cents.

Response by SPC Matthew Birkinbine made Feb 27 at 2015 10:46 AM

2015-02-27T10:46:33-05:00

Those sound like good qualifications, and to be rated among the best, and receive faster timed promotions, those should be minimum qualification requirements; however, I don't agree with the fact that a soldier who's promotable but receives an article 15 can, by AR 600-8-19, be reintegrated into promotion standings, but a soldier who fails a pt test or body composition has to reboard to be reintegrated. If anyone has further insight on this, please let me know. It sounds like, get an article 15, no problem, you're still a great soldier; but enjoy eating, not enjoy working out enough to keep your shape, and know your job, and you're a dirtbag.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 2 at 2016 12:00 PM

2016-02-02T12:00:15-05:00

SPC(P) I believe that the requirements are fair. However, I also believe that you should have some sort of proficiency testing in your MOS as well.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 29 at 2016 9:28 AM

2016-02-29T09:28:34-05:00

The AF places a job qualification standard into the promotion process. To me, that is better than having someone try to achieve "_________ of the Quarter (Month or Year)."

Know your job, lead your subordinates, complete your schools and courses, and do your job.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2016 6:34 PM

2016-10-29T18:34:19-04:00

Select-Train-Educate-Promote...most of you need to check this out. One more thing...it's BLC now and not WLC. Just sitting here shaking my head at the fact that it seems most of you leaders don't know this already.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2016 6:57 PM

2016-10-29T18:57:31-04:00

Ok, so since no one really wants to bite the bullet and be the bad guy here, I'll do it to save you from the biggest kick in the a$$ from IG. The US Army, The Big A, the green machine itself has spent hundreds of thousand of dollars, man hours, and god knows how much rank deciding what the criteria for promotion to SGT are. Who in the name of General Patton's short and curlies are you to decide that you know better than Army G1 what is required for someone to become a SGT? This is the same nonsense that I have seen over and over again with units trying to put out things like "You are going to be flagged if you don't have a 270 PT Score" or "You can only go to sick call if you tell us 24hrs in advance." Look folks, everyone and their brother things that can do it better, smarter, stronger, or whatever than "the standard." I'm going to give you a fair warning, if you hold a soldier that meets "Army standard" back from promotion because of some imaginary standard that you have made up, they have every right to file an IG or god forbid a Congressional. If that happens, you better hope that someone who has Command authority is the one that put the policy in place.
There are some grey areas when it come to recommending a Soldier to the board, but again you need to take guidance from your CDR and CSM. If you as a supervisor enact all these extra little things, what happens when SPC Snuffy from the motorpool who has a 181 PT score, scored 27 at the range, and doesn't know what SMoQ stands for goes to the promotion board and gets recommended? Now your troop has a very well founded complaint and you will have to stand in front of someone and answer the question of why you held that troop back.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2016 8:55 PM

2016-10-29T20:55:56-04:00

I disagree with those rules. If the Army has standards such as 180 APFT and 23 marksmanship than that is the standard. If the regulations change to reflect these higher standards then that will be fine if/when it happens.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 29 at 2016 9:19 PM

2016-10-29T21:19:01-04:00

I can see SSD1 and WLC, which gives examples, courses, teaching on how to be a better leader, situations you may be in, paperwork you may have to fill out as an E-5, etc. Weapon proficiency is aweseome but I'd rather an E-5 who could help me do my job than shoot almost an expert while sitting still looking at a target that is stationary and pops up for 5 seconds. PT is good because us as soldiers swear to be physically and mentally tough. However regardless of how many push-ups one can do does not determine leadership or situational capability to lead.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 30 at 2016 12:02 AM

2016-10-30T00:02:14-04:00

Nope. I would like to see a peer approval. written or in person, if peers are tools, then approval by NCO support channel.

Response by Sgt Dale Briggs made Oct 30 at 2016 3:44 PM

2016-10-30T15:44:19-04:00

To be promoted to E5, obviously know your job well. . If your leading and training other's there's no substitute. No disciplinary actions. The other skills like PT scores and range qualification are important too, you can't have a Plt Sgt who can't get first class pt scores or goes unk at the range. It's very basic with those two, but to lead you need thst part as well. NCO school too, it was mandatory for us at e4.

Response by SGT William Revis made Oct 30 at 2016 10:33 PM

2016-10-30T22:33:15-04:00

Promotion board

Response by CPO Joe Jester made Jul 30 at 2017 4:12 PM

2017-07-30T16:12:58-04:00

Why is SOQ in the list?