Advanced Leaders Course (ALC formerly BNCOC)
Advanced Leaders Course (ALC formerly BNCOC)
Posted on Mar 19, 2016
Can a CSM deny orders for a leadership school such as BLC or ALC just because you don't get a 70 in each PT event?
103K
653
410
20
20
0
I'm sure they can deny an extra school like air assault but I feel like as long as you meet the army standard of 60 in each event he can't deny a leadership school and halt your career
Posted in these groups: 
CSM
Basic Leaders Course (BLC formerly WLC PLDC)
Advanced Leaders Course (ALC formerly BNCOC)
NCOES
CSM Basic Leaders Course (BLC formerly WLC PLDC) Advanced Leaders Course (ALC formerly BNCOC) NCOES
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 169
96
96
0
Technically, no. But what may happen is if somebody with a low PT score goes to NCOES and fails the APFT the CSM will be on the carpet explaining why he or she sent somebody who couldn't pass. Me? I don't worry about it. If you get a 60 in each event I'm sending you and you can end your career if you fail when you get there.
(96)
(0)
CSM Mike Maynard
SGM David Poehlein - haha, annnnnnd roger, and loving it. But, anything to do with standards still gets my goat and I feel compelled to contribute. Why does your status say "V" for Veteran instead of "R" for retired? Aren't you retired?
(0)
(0)
CSM Mike Maynard
CSM (Join to see) - Amen, amen, amen! You're kind of thinking will make the Army better - point blank!
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I have never been a PT stud but yet I've managed to promote through the ranks. It's fascinating the emphasis that "leaders" put on PT but you don't see the same zeal for weapons quals.
(0)
(0)
56
56
0
All Army Schools have published standards as prerequisites for attendance. Requiring a Soldier to achieve a 70 point in each event passing score for attendance is incorrect (according to all regulatory guidance), but applied as a measure to assure a Soldier is capable of achieving more than the minimums, and is a common practice for the chain of command. As a former CSM and a current Inspector General that is how it is. BUT..... If you go into any Army leadership school with the idea that you can do just the minimums and pass I can almost guarantee that you will fail the first PT test- and be eliminated from the opportunity to be one of the top three graduates in the class. The command is, "you have two minutes to do as many repetitions as you can", NOT, "do enough to achieve 60%". You will lose 5-10 reps just because you are not paying attention to form when you start your test. You want to be an NCO? Lose the mentality of doing "just enough to get by". The Army needs leaders, not paycheck collectors. We have enough of the latter, and not enough of the former. Get with the program, Sergeant.
(56)
(0)
SFC Dave Parker
Is an NCO that just does the minimum a good example for his subordinates? Is that who you want to promote up the ranks? A good leader is expected to go above and beyond the bare minimum. If there is a shortage of allocations for the schools, then the higher performing NCOs need to be rewarded with the slots to help them get promoted, as they really want to excel and be good examples to their subordinates. A low performing NCO is more likely leave the service, and the higher performing NCOs are more likely to stay in and make the Army a long term profession.
(2)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
Again........well said, CSM! It’s hard to argue with the book.......or common sense (guess which there is more of most times?)
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
I don't think that SGT said he was only shooting for minimums, he was asking whether it was appropriate for a CSM to deny career progression, based on what I think we all agree, is an unfair/inappropriate application of the standards. If he MEETS the "standards" then by definition, he should be allowed to take the initiative. If as you suggest, he's a slug, then he will fail to meet the standards, and won't progress of his own accord.
(0)
(0)
CSM James Winslow
I thought I answered the question. in retrospect, I guess I didn't. No, it is not appropriate (or legal) for a CSM to deny a Soldier attendance at a Leadership school for only acheiving 60% on a PT test. Only the commander can do that. BUT- the commander is not going to send anyone who will possibly embarrass the command, nor will he (probably) tolerate an NCO who believes that 60% of anything is good enough. A 60% effort get people killed. I would not want someone to pack 60% of my parachute.
(0)
(0)
23
23
0
The short answer is yes they absolutely can and all these people giving advice are not your leadership. Request an open door and keep training. Maybe propose to take another diagnostic with the 1SG or CSM there to observe so they would be more confident in your performance.
(23)
(0)
1SG Dustin Springer
Now with the new STEP program it takes a 4187 from the first general officer in the COC and submitted to HRC and I am sure a GO will not send a deferment for someone that is meeting the standard in accordance with 350-1, 7-22, or 600-9.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint - The penalty varies depending on command...the worst penalty I know of is if you fail a NCOES you can be kicked out of the army. I have also saw soldiers getting demoted but they were allowed to stay in the army.
(0)
(0)
SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint
I think if we hit them in the wallet, we will get them motivated. The APFT failures are wasting their time, their leaders time, the chain of cmd time and taxpayer money. The PT failures should pay have the cost of their failed TDY pulled from their next paycheck. It is an administrative action. It is not NJP. It is administrative because you failed to complete the mission of training. Soldier's responsibility.
(1)
(0)
CSM Mike Maynard
SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint - I like you're thinking, but not necessary. If an NCO fails NCOES it prevents them from re-enlisting and if they are already INDEF, it will cause them to be selected for QSP. Basically, their time in service is over.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google