Posted on Apr 20, 2014
What do you think of these requirements for promotion to Sergeant (E-5)?
36.7K
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
1
1
0
SPC(P) Funt,
What about technical competence? We must know our job as a force.
V/r
CW3 Jones
What about technical competence? We must know our job as a force.
V/r
CW3 Jones
(1)
(0)
SGT Shaul Funt
Chief, lets start with the basics. it's hard to assess that (knowing our job) every MOS is different
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
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."
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
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!
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!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
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.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
(1)
(0)
SSG William Sutter
Those standards are only enforced if the NCOs enforce it. If the NCO enforces it and the Soldier still don't then document it and prevent that next promotion.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
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
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
(1)
(0)
SGT Shaul Funt
MSgt,
I didn't really understand your answer.
How do you get promoted to become an NCO in the AF?
(0)
(0)
MSgt Keith Hebert
Remember I was in air guard
Living the standard, proven leadership, completing all required schools commander approval and board
Living the standard, proven leadership, completing all required schools commander approval and board
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
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.
(1)
(0)
SGT Shaul Funt
Sir,
It is not a requirement in my unit.
It's was just a question that was running in my head
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
CW2 Joseph Evans
Service Member of the Quarter. Its a reference to how well they have performed at previous boards. Some commands like to evaluate a Service Members ability to perform under similar situations before actually sending them to the board.
I personally think its a BS requirement and creates an unreasonable bottleneck in the promotion process, especially for cohorts. Even Soldier of the Month Awardee causes the same problem. Maybe just attendance at a board would do the job.
I personally think its a BS requirement and creates an unreasonable bottleneck in the promotion process, especially for cohorts. Even Soldier of the Month Awardee causes the same problem. Maybe just attendance at a board would do the job.
(0)
(0)
CPO Joe Jester
If a person performs well enough to be SOQ that performance can be reflected in their evaluations. So you are basically rewarding a person twice for the same performance. So if you have two equally performing people with equal evaluations, but one manages to get SOQ, they get the preference in the advancement game while the other rides the pine as a second string soldier.
I understand there needs to be a discrimination mechanism to sort the best qualified for advancement, after all, someone said they were qualified to advance. I don't think SOQ should be in the mix as SOQ influences other factors that are already considered. You may correct me if my service does things differently than yours.
I understand there needs to be a discrimination mechanism to sort the best qualified for advancement, after all, someone said they were qualified to advance. I don't think SOQ should be in the mix as SOQ influences other factors that are already considered. You may correct me if my service does things differently than yours.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google