Posted on Mar 21, 2017
The nation's foremost military experts have 39 ideas for modernizing its personnel system
2.09K
8
14
2
2
0
Your thoughts?
The nation's foremost military experts have 39 ideas for modernizing its personnel system
Posted from militarytimes.com
Ideas
Military Family
Military Career
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 5
2
2
0
The individuals that are responsible for this report have their heads so far into the clouds, that they appear to be suffering from hypoxia.
Like I stated in a comment on another article about this same report - Information in this article is just unbelievable. I felt as though I stepped through the looking glass and went back to the past.
Like I stated in a comment on another article about this same report - Information in this article is just unbelievable. I felt as though I stepped through the looking glass and went back to the past.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Can someone explain this? -
"Creating "rapid-recruiting organizations" within each of the services to fast-track the accession of "nonstandard" military recruits. "
That option to add progression in accordance with skill accumulation can get pretty sticky depending on MOS, by the way.
25, 92, 42, and a few other CMF's have tech certifications. What about 11 CMF past EIB and special skills schools? Or would that expand to other unit-essential schools - DTMS, etc.?
Which of these are you most for?
"Creating "rapid-recruiting organizations" within each of the services to fast-track the accession of "nonstandard" military recruits. "
That option to add progression in accordance with skill accumulation can get pretty sticky depending on MOS, by the way.
25, 92, 42, and a few other CMF's have tech certifications. What about 11 CMF past EIB and special skills schools? Or would that expand to other unit-essential schools - DTMS, etc.?
Which of these are you most for?
(2)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
MAJ (Join to see) - I remember the Stripes for Skills programs of the 1970s, did not work very well then, and probably would not work very well now. What is interesting is that a number of the skills in the program from that time period are actually outsourced in today's Army. One example is Cooks. How many workers/cooks in todays dining facilities are civilians, to include CONUS, OCONUS, and combat zones/areas?
Cooks, logisticians, engineers, and mechanics come to mind as being outsourced to companies like KBR and DynCorp International come to mind.
Cooks, logisticians, engineers, and mechanics come to mind as being outsourced to companies like KBR and DynCorp International come to mind.
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) Require lots of experience and technical leadership, but not the military follow me type of leadership required in combat arms type. Technical Professional Engineers and such, they'd have a hard time leading a route clearance company but would be very well suited for a construction planning cell. Things of that nature.
(1)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SSG Robert Webster - I think that is exactly why they are replacing the program, cooks are a perfect example, as well as every other career field that has been contracted out. Military cooks can defend themselves in theater even be tasked with base defense and combat patrols, contracted cooks generally are not permitted by international agreement (SOFA) to bear arms. re-militarizing our military will be great, even if it has some growing pains and lessons learned.
(1)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
MAJ (Join to see) - Which program are you referring to, when you say "replacing the program?"
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
MAJ (Join to see)
It's a paper for DoD, doesn't address VA as that is a separate department altogether.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
They are two separate secretaries, long ago it was discovered that using the DoD to pay for veterans care has a conflict of interest as DoD's priority is winning the nations wars not taking care of vets, so budgets got prioritized for weapons systems not veteran care, by using two departments the two budgets are separate so only congress can allocate funding between them, not a secretary or a president.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google