Posted on Apr 6, 2014
Would you prefer to work with somebody more physically fit, or with more job proficiency?
28.8K
481
150
15
15
0
If you were allowed to select individuals that work for you, which quality would lend more weight to your decision. <div><br></div><div>Would you rather have a Service member that knows all the ins and outs of their specialty but is mediocre at physical fitness or a Service Member that excels in physical fitness but is mediocre at their job.</div>
Fitness
Proficiency
Competence
Edited 12 y ago
Posted 12 y ago
Responses: 108
3
3
0
3
3
0
My personal opinion: I prefer Job Proficiency. Â Are you getting pay based on your APFT score?
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
In my field a physically fit Soldier can carry out when you've been electrocuted. A technically proficient Soldier will not make the mistake that gets you electrocuted.
Work smarter not harder.
Work smarter not harder.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
I've seen plenty of troops who could smoke the pt test but seemed like their heads were filled with concrete. My job is in operations so being proficient and having the ability to use common sense, critical thinking skills, staying professional, and being able to implement all this is well more important in that job than a 300 on the pt test. Don't get me wrong I don't want failures but so long as they pass and are proficient I'd take them over the meathead any day.
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
It is far more important to be good at your job than to be physically fit and not know what you are doing. In Iraq, I had "Fat Body" troops that were some of the best troops I ever had the pleasure to lead. Whereas, some of the worst troops were the perfect PT scoring studs, but they were terrible at their jobs and needed to be micro-managed constantly to avoid them doing something stupid that would get someone killed. I will take the person best at their job any day over a PT stud.Â
(3)
(0)
SGT Jason Doyle
I'll agree to disagree. Bottom line is what would you prefer, a good worker, or someone that looks good in a uniform. I'll take the good worker all day, everyday.Â
(1)
(0)
MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca
Whole-heartedly agree! I have struggled with weight all my life and did on deployment as well, as well as having to counsel my soldiers on the same issue. Its funny how because of weight or PT, you can't attend an Army school but when it comes to a deployment its a different story. Is it me or has anyone else noticed that there is never a scale by the boarding ladder or ramp to a C-130 nor a mandatory PT test before you get on the plane, but yet you can be denied any favorable personnel action, other than not getting on the plane, while deployed and serving your country. Things that make you go Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot!!!
(1)
(0)
MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca
Now on the flip side of the coin yes, being physically fit and on weight is vital to individual health and in general, any operation and I agree with the posts that say it makes a soldiers job easier. But I have yet to, though I'm sure there are plenty of cases out there, run into an issue in my career or with any of the troops I've known where they couldn't perform 100% of their duties because they were overweight or missed passing a PT test by a few SU/PU or a few seconds over on the run. It is a fine line between maintaining standards and being 100% fit for duty and for the greater benefit, standards must be maintained. Been there, done that and got the T-shirt!
(1)
(0)
SGT Hector Rojas, AIGA, SHA
I'll throw this out there, the Army only requires one PT standard forcewide, 180. 181 already means "meets and exceeds".
In order to enter, some MOS only require a 31 GT Score while others require a 110 GT score. They both need the same 180 PT score to be Army standard.
My best PT score was a 245 during deployment last year, at 45 years old i want to believe i was in shape, obviously someone else thought I was since I was the CLS guy for a DART team.
I'm in an aviation unit and I've seen reclass soldiers come in as PT studs , and while I'm sure they can carry me on their shoulders while firing from their hip, their analitical skills are not all there.
Point I'm trying to make is, while physical fitness may help you get promoted faster, proficiency in your job is what will get you earn you the respect of your peers. I guess it all depends on what your career goals are.
Chastizing soldiers for only getting a 200 PT score serves no purpose, as they are "meeting and exceeding" army standards. We should of course encourage them to do better, for their career's sake.
We should chastize soldiers for not being proficient at their jobs or taking the initiative to improve their skills.
Respectfuly.
In order to enter, some MOS only require a 31 GT Score while others require a 110 GT score. They both need the same 180 PT score to be Army standard.
My best PT score was a 245 during deployment last year, at 45 years old i want to believe i was in shape, obviously someone else thought I was since I was the CLS guy for a DART team.
I'm in an aviation unit and I've seen reclass soldiers come in as PT studs , and while I'm sure they can carry me on their shoulders while firing from their hip, their analitical skills are not all there.
Point I'm trying to make is, while physical fitness may help you get promoted faster, proficiency in your job is what will get you earn you the respect of your peers. I guess it all depends on what your career goals are.
Chastizing soldiers for only getting a 200 PT score serves no purpose, as they are "meeting and exceeding" army standards. We should of course encourage them to do better, for their career's sake.
We should chastize soldiers for not being proficient at their jobs or taking the initiative to improve their skills.
Respectfuly.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Lets see, if we were needing to form a Greek phalanx and fight an enemy where we were out numbered 10 to 1, I'd still choose job proficiency.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
It goes like this:
Heart Surgeon A: I graduated top of my class and I have been practicing for over 20 years, and I score a 190 on the PT test
Heart Surgeon B: I didn't graduate top of my class, I haven't practiced in a few years but now I am back at it again in the Army but hey, I score a 290 on the PT test.
Which one do you want to operate on your mother>
Heart Surgeon A: I graduated top of my class and I have been practicing for over 20 years, and I score a 190 on the PT test
Heart Surgeon B: I didn't graduate top of my class, I haven't practiced in a few years but now I am back at it again in the Army but hey, I score a 290 on the PT test.
Which one do you want to operate on your mother>
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
I disagree with the either/or choice. My ideal candidate is the GEN Marshall proverbial "PhD who can win a bar fight". The either/or choice implies that one is more important than the other when, in my opinion, both are important for a Soldier. One reason we have military engineers is that civilians generally do not like to get shot at while working. Military engineers are therefore needed to both be competent in their job and to be physically fit enough to not just do their job but also to survive catastrophic injury. Simply stated, a Soldier is more likely to survive getting shot or severely injured if they are physically fit.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
In my field you need to have both. An MP who is overweight looks worse once they put on a bullet proof vest. Then they have to possess the mental ability to do the job due to the legal ramifications.
(2)
(0)
SPC Travis Hopkinson
you want to be an MP you have to be thin, and make sure your command keeps on with the 10 mile runs :) , they are so fun
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Job proficiency. I worked with enough motards who could max a PT test, but didn't know difference between their butthole and the hole in the ground
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google