Posted on Aug 18, 2014
Almost 8,000 Navy Chiefs face the chopping Block.
12.3K
101
63
7
7
0
The Navy announced today that almost 8,000 E-7, 8 and 9 personnel on Active Duty and reserves face review and could be subject to release from the service or forced to retire. Is this good for the Navy or is it a slap in the face for all Senior Chief Petty Officers.
This Review Board is going to look at the person's entire career to determine if he/she should be retained or separated. Every Sailor in the Senior 3 paygrades eligible for retirement and with at least three years time in rate will be reviewed, up to and including the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy. Does this send a bad signal to our troops?
This Review Board is going to look at the person's entire career to determine if he/she should be retained or separated. Every Sailor in the Senior 3 paygrades eligible for retirement and with at least three years time in rate will be reviewed, up to and including the Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy. Does this send a bad signal to our troops?
Posted in these groups: 
Senior NCO
Retirement
Senior NCO Retirement
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 18
9
9
0
The article says no quotas, but I'm pretty sure that's bovine excrement. The key is when they say they're looking at the ENTIRE career. Oh, failed a PRT back in 1998, but have gotten excellents and outstandings since? *checks "Failed PFA" box.*
They're not culling the weakest chiefs; they're reducing manning.
They're not culling the weakest chiefs; they're reducing manning.
(9)
(0)
CPO William E. Mahoney
Master Chief I am sure you would agree that the Navy performance system has been floor, while serving on the Carrier America the mess was 200 strong and everyone was 4.0 and most truly were doing more then just their jobs so as you stated the board needed to review further back in their records to pick the best, there is no difference in this situation.
(0)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
If all the chiefs are doing more than their jobs, then we probably shouldn't get rid of them.
(1)
(0)
CMDCM Gene Treants
LCDR (Join to see) actually my rating is CMDCM since I carried the NEC and completed 4 tours as a CMDCM. Since I retired I really have never thought much about it since my ID reads MCPO. I agree with you and most of my "mistakes" never made it into my record because they were handled at the CPO level or below with EMI or a good swift butt chewing, both techniques I used frequently myself. NJP was for the Sailors who would/could not learn and really did not understand how the Navy worked.
(3)
(0)
CMDCM Gene Treants
CPO William E. Mahoney I fully agree that many Chiefs perform at the 4.0 level and it really pissed me off the first time I had to then Rank our 4.0 Chiefs. By the time you make CHIEF, YOU ARE ALREADY ONE OF THE BEST. I fully expected my Chiefs to perform at that level and was seldom disappointed once they had a little time in the community. Yes there were some who stood out at both ends of the scale, but not many on the low end. The bell curve for Chiefs tended to be very heavy toward the High Achievers.
(3)
(0)
5
5
0
I think its a solid plan. I am not at all stoked for people to get axed for the wrong reason. With that said if you are not performing and doing your job as a SEL why should you be allowed to hide out and collect more on your retirement? I plan on doing 30 if the military allows me to. I love what I do. I would love to see Anchors pinned on my collar next year. But, I also know that being a Navy Senior Enlisted leader is not my ultimate calling. I plan on fast tracking into the MC as a DO. People need to stay in and retire for the right reason, I understand that it isn't easy to transition into civilian lifestyle without proper licensing and degrees, but is it right to allow those people to stay in and collect a paycheck to sit behind a desk and not do their jobs and be the deckplate leadership the Navy has charged them to do?
Its not the Navy's fault if you were to lazy or scared to take the extra step to go to school and advance yourself and your civilian life. This will send a message and it will be a clear one. Step up and be Deck Plate leaders or someone will and you will be gone.
Its not the Navy's fault if you were to lazy or scared to take the extra step to go to school and advance yourself and your civilian life. This will send a message and it will be a clear one. Step up and be Deck Plate leaders or someone will and you will be gone.
(5)
(0)
CMDCM Gene Treants
I have a hard time believing that the eval system has failed enough for the hard chargers and real powers on the boats at Kings Bay and ships in the fleet to be overcome by the slackers and professional students at sea. That never happened in my time and hopefully the COB/CMC is making sure it does not happen today.
(3)
(0)
LCDR (Join to see)
Not only is it happening, but it's widely regarded as the rule rather than the exception.
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
LCDR (Join to see) - I don't know everywhere that you have served, but I know for a fact that that wasn't happening and frowned upon where I served. I sat more selection boards (mainly MCPO) than most and know college and collateral duties were a bonus, but if your regular job was not up to par no amount of college or collateral duties could help you.
This is not the first time the Navy has done this. Unfortunately, we do have some Chiefs in the community that decide to go on the ROAD program and expect to coast to retirement long before their date. I knew a few E-9s in E-7 jobs, just so they didn't have to move. The board has been pretty fair in the past and I wouldn't expect them to change the way they do business this time.
This is not the first time the Navy has done this. Unfortunately, we do have some Chiefs in the community that decide to go on the ROAD program and expect to coast to retirement long before their date. I knew a few E-9s in E-7 jobs, just so they didn't have to move. The board has been pretty fair in the past and I wouldn't expect them to change the way they do business this time.
LCDR (Join to see)
The issue comes in what the board is allowed to see. When CMCs favor the CFL or CSADD mentor over the Chief who takes care of his/her Sailors, then the board sees ChiefEvals that reflect this flawed priority. Thirty seconds in the tank may not be the best way to select leaders...
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Master Chief, the Coast Guard has implemented a similar system. In principle, it appears to be a sound idea, but I have to wonder about how it will be in actual practice given the obvious budget problems. Senior people cost much more money than junior people so seperating them saves more cash. It seems to make seniors easy targets particularly if records back to boot camp are going to be reviewed. We were all stupid kids at one point in our careers, but most of us simply overcame it, and have obviously put together good careers in order to advance to CPO. Why penalize somebody now for something that happened when they were a nonrate?
The serious concern is that those senior people are also the holders of our corporate knowledge. They are typically the most skilled technicians and keepers of the faith (traditions and heritage). What happens to any of our services when those who know what to do, and how to do it better than everybody else leave? How much worse off will we be when those people are also the people who keep us true to our core values and are most likely to honor our respective histories?
The serious concern is that those senior people are also the holders of our corporate knowledge. They are typically the most skilled technicians and keepers of the faith (traditions and heritage). What happens to any of our services when those who know what to do, and how to do it better than everybody else leave? How much worse off will we be when those people are also the people who keep us true to our core values and are most likely to honor our respective histories?
(3)
(0)
CMDCM Gene Treants
Totally concur CMC Robert Young. We hold the knowledge, the tradition and most importantly the ability to train our juniors and seniors in all aspects of our services. As members of the mess, what message does it send to our troops if the swatch cuts the good as well as the lazy and incompetent?
(1)
(0)
CPO Eugene Gillam
Personally I'd rather keep someone who'd "learned from their mistakes" early in their career than someone who was goody freaking two-shoes the whole time. The former can relate with, and possibly help straighten out, their juniors while the latter will strictly follow the book and maybe end a potentially great career early. Speaking from experience here.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google