Soldiers
Soldiers
8
8
0
Anyone else fed up with the quality of the product leaving basic/AIT?
I’m about sick of the types of Soldier I keep getting out of AIT. I get guys who look like 200lbs of chewed bubble gum and can’t pass a PT test three weeks removed from AIT. They can’t handle a 1 3/4” handline with 100 psi on the end (firefighters). I’ll put them in the gym and they can’t bench the bar. How did these people make it out of fire school? Is TRADOC so desperate to keep their numbers looking good that they’ll pump shit through the pipes to make it happen? These guys are unfit to do the job and they’re generally untrainable but I have to keep them because USARC says so. I’m freaking tired of it. And for you recruiters out there, quit looking these scrawny little high school kids who have never done so much as pick up a pencil physically and telling them that firefighting is a good fit for them. It’s not and it’s clogging up spots that could be filled with people capable of doing the job. And please don’t give me the “you’re an NCO, it’s your job to train them” crap. I’ve got a group of guy that myself along with a number of other great NCO’s have molded into very good Soldiers/firefighters. The other group is untrainable shit. This isn’t an MOS for untrainable shit.
I’m about sick of the types of Soldier I keep getting out of AIT. I get guys who look like 200lbs of chewed bubble gum and can’t pass a PT test three weeks removed from AIT. They can’t handle a 1 3/4” handline with 100 psi on the end (firefighters). I’ll put them in the gym and they can’t bench the bar. How did these people make it out of fire school? Is TRADOC so desperate to keep their numbers looking good that they’ll pump shit through the pipes to make it happen? These guys are unfit to do the job and they’re generally untrainable but I have to keep them because USARC says so. I’m freaking tired of it. And for you recruiters out there, quit looking these scrawny little high school kids who have never done so much as pick up a pencil physically and telling them that firefighting is a good fit for them. It’s not and it’s clogging up spots that could be filled with people capable of doing the job. And please don’t give me the “you’re an NCO, it’s your job to train them” crap. I’ve got a group of guy that myself along with a number of other great NCO’s have molded into very good Soldiers/firefighters. The other group is untrainable shit. This isn’t an MOS for untrainable shit.
Training
Advanced Individual Training (AIT)
Soldiers
12M: Firefighter
Posted 5 y ago
Responses: 17
7
7
0
In 2000, I evaluated a record APFT for an OSUT unit in phase 5 (AIT). Nearly every PLT guidon had a Phase 3 APFT streamer.
Here are my observations:
DS and other graders did not know where they should be properly positioned to grade the event.
Graders did not enforce standard for push ups. Specifically, graders counted push ups when the upper arm failed to reach the horizontal plane; and/or when arms weren't extended at the end of the repetition.
Graders counted sit ups when the Soldier failed to sit up to where the base of their neck reached vertical of the base of the spine; and, failed to terminate Soldiers who rested in the down position.
The disgust must have been obvious on my face as I watched yet another Soldier resting in the down position for the sit up for no less than 3 seconds, repeatedly. The Soldiers would move their elbows up and down to feign attempting to come up, but the rest of the body, abs specifically, were relaxed. The Company Commander asked what the problem was. I explained that the DSs werent in a position to properly observe the exercise; this particular Soldier was obviously resting while feigning an attempt to rise, and asserted it was my opinion that this was a coached behavior, since I had observed multiple Soldiers doing it, and graders not terminating the event.
I then walked over to the DS and said, "DS, the word your looking for is terminate."
Commanders want the stats for OERs, and DSs for NCOERs. The wrong metrics are used to evaluate performance, and, no, I have no idea what the fix is.
Here are my observations:
DS and other graders did not know where they should be properly positioned to grade the event.
Graders did not enforce standard for push ups. Specifically, graders counted push ups when the upper arm failed to reach the horizontal plane; and/or when arms weren't extended at the end of the repetition.
Graders counted sit ups when the Soldier failed to sit up to where the base of their neck reached vertical of the base of the spine; and, failed to terminate Soldiers who rested in the down position.
The disgust must have been obvious on my face as I watched yet another Soldier resting in the down position for the sit up for no less than 3 seconds, repeatedly. The Soldiers would move their elbows up and down to feign attempting to come up, but the rest of the body, abs specifically, were relaxed. The Company Commander asked what the problem was. I explained that the DSs werent in a position to properly observe the exercise; this particular Soldier was obviously resting while feigning an attempt to rise, and asserted it was my opinion that this was a coached behavior, since I had observed multiple Soldiers doing it, and graders not terminating the event.
I then walked over to the DS and said, "DS, the word your looking for is terminate."
Commanders want the stats for OERs, and DSs for NCOERs. The wrong metrics are used to evaluate performance, and, no, I have no idea what the fix is.
(7)
(0)
7
7
0
Having just finished my time on the trail I can tell you with 100% accuracy that it is solely a numbers game. Commanders at every level are concerned only with getting the highest percentage possible graduated. When I first became a Drill Sergeant I had delusions of grandeur where I honestly believed I could change things at least in my small corner of BCT. I now know just how wrong I was. I would invite you to do a tour on the trail or recruiting and see for yourself what the reality is here in TRADOC. Although I have time and again attempted to dissect where the failure lies, I cannot be sure. I am able to sense the immense pressure that Commanders at the Company and Battalion level are under to produce as many “Soldiers” as possible. It is an unfortunate situation and until we truly can look at attrition with the idea that not everyone making it is a good thing for the Army, we will continue to struggle as an organization on a large scale. I can tell you this: that private that you get that is 200lbs of chewed up bubble gum, I had him when we was 300lbs of calf just weined off of Mom’s mill who couldn’t do 1 push-up and ran and 30 min 2 mile.
(7)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
That’s the key right there. Making those at the top understand that not everyone getting through is a good thing. And just to be clear I’m not attacking you guys that administer the training. You do a fantastic job with what you are given.
(1)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
I wasn’t feeling attacked. Trust me, it is with strong reservations that I send many “Soldiers” onto AIT that have questionably met the standard. I just wanted to give you some insight on why you are receiving individuals that are not up to snuff. I would encourage you to send your concerns up the chain any way you can. It’s going to take a change from within and it’s only to get worse before it gets better. “This We’ll Defend”SFC (Join to see)
(2)
(0)
Suspended Profile
As a Drill seregeant and as a Drill Sergeant Leader, there is a lot for me to want to say. I will try to be succinct, though.
My job as a Drill Sergeant is primarily to inculcate the Army values and to train aspiring professionals in our profession of arms.
If a soldier meets the standard of training, I must grade them fairly and send them on. However, if a trainee is “unfit” for service, I must thoroughly document it and justify beyond mere opinion.
If I, as the drill sergeant, don’t counsel and give the trainee every opportunity to improve, then the trainee will continue on. Further, if I fail to paint a picture to the commander as to why the soldier is unfit, then it falls on me as to why the trainee continues.
What I’ve noticed is that NCOs would get rid of 90% of trainees if the commander didn’t act as a check and balance. Further, we get so caught up in training that we don’t put the extra work into the administrative requirements and unfit trainees continue on.
While I’ve heard commanders say that it is easier to get rid of us than it is a trainee, I’ve also had that same commander tell me that if I’ve done my job documenting the deficiencies and afforded the trainee the opportunity and guidances to improve, that he would push the drop packet without hesitation.I have found it to be true.
Lastly, there are those who I assume pencil whip records (as it helps with NCOER numbers), and I can’t really speak to that. But ultimately, if you want to put your skills to the test of being an all-around NCO, come on down to the drill sergeant academy and kick up dust in our boots in order to experience the challenges we face. It’s a great experience and I encourage you to see the work that goes in.
At the end of the day, not every trainee I graduated was Steve Rodgers, but they met the standard. What happens after that is beyond me.
Great post!
My job as a Drill Sergeant is primarily to inculcate the Army values and to train aspiring professionals in our profession of arms.
If a soldier meets the standard of training, I must grade them fairly and send them on. However, if a trainee is “unfit” for service, I must thoroughly document it and justify beyond mere opinion.
If I, as the drill sergeant, don’t counsel and give the trainee every opportunity to improve, then the trainee will continue on. Further, if I fail to paint a picture to the commander as to why the soldier is unfit, then it falls on me as to why the trainee continues.
What I’ve noticed is that NCOs would get rid of 90% of trainees if the commander didn’t act as a check and balance. Further, we get so caught up in training that we don’t put the extra work into the administrative requirements and unfit trainees continue on.
While I’ve heard commanders say that it is easier to get rid of us than it is a trainee, I’ve also had that same commander tell me that if I’ve done my job documenting the deficiencies and afforded the trainee the opportunity and guidances to improve, that he would push the drop packet without hesitation.I have found it to be true.
Lastly, there are those who I assume pencil whip records (as it helps with NCOER numbers), and I can’t really speak to that. But ultimately, if you want to put your skills to the test of being an all-around NCO, come on down to the drill sergeant academy and kick up dust in our boots in order to experience the challenges we face. It’s a great experience and I encourage you to see the work that goes in.
At the end of the day, not every trainee I graduated was Steve Rodgers, but they met the standard. What happens after that is beyond me.
Great post!
SFC (Join to see)
Thanks for the reply. Just to be clear, and I’m sure you didn’t take it this way, but I’m not attacking those who administer the training. I know you guys do a hell of a job turning regular joes into serviceable Soldiers and I know that your hands are somewhat tied when it comes to sending them home. The problems start at the top with those numbers. Those numbers, though they look good to TRADOC, make life a living hell for leaders in operational commands when they can’t maintain readiness due to the new “soldiers” inherent inability to stay ready and their unwillingness to get there.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
SFC (Join to see)
I understand your frustration. I also think a great deal of the problem is less the officers and tradoc as it is us as NCOs in those positions not being thorough. If we (DSs) spent less time complaining about how officers have “taken” our power and spent more time exercising it in the form of counseling rather than corrective action, we’d be getting results more in line with the product we want to see. I mean, even more corrective training that can build a substandard trainee is more effective than approaching our jobs as if we can’t execute the mission without passing a substandard product. We just have to do our jobs... the whole job. And that’s where I think issue lies. We give our power up by assuming an officer is going to block us. I send sergeants to the drop board for not meeting the standards, not my opinion. If the counselings don’t reflect that the sergeant needs to try again, then that’s fine. But believe that my documentation is present and accurate. We deal in people’s careers. It’s great to have checks and balances- and you’d be surprised at the level some of the seasoned NCOs come here as, but there’s only two ways to do things, right and again. But all benefit of doubt rightfully goes to the candidates and trainees alike. It’s our jobs to insure that there is no doubt when they are evaluated for further training.
We just have to do OUR jobs.
I understand your frustration. I also think a great deal of the problem is less the officers and tradoc as it is us as NCOs in those positions not being thorough. If we (DSs) spent less time complaining about how officers have “taken” our power and spent more time exercising it in the form of counseling rather than corrective action, we’d be getting results more in line with the product we want to see. I mean, even more corrective training that can build a substandard trainee is more effective than approaching our jobs as if we can’t execute the mission without passing a substandard product. We just have to do our jobs... the whole job. And that’s where I think issue lies. We give our power up by assuming an officer is going to block us. I send sergeants to the drop board for not meeting the standards, not my opinion. If the counselings don’t reflect that the sergeant needs to try again, then that’s fine. But believe that my documentation is present and accurate. We deal in people’s careers. It’s great to have checks and balances- and you’d be surprised at the level some of the seasoned NCOs come here as, but there’s only two ways to do things, right and again. But all benefit of doubt rightfully goes to the candidates and trainees alike. It’s our jobs to insure that there is no doubt when they are evaluated for further training.
We just have to do OUR jobs.
SFC J Fullerton
"If a soldier meets the standard of training, I must grade them fairly and send them on. However, if a trainee is “unfit” for service, I must thoroughly document it and justify beyond mere opinion." Agreed. Same applies to recruiting. If the applicant actually WANTS to enlist, meets all qualifications per AR 601-210 for enlistment, and qualifies for the desired MOS, we put their ass in boots and ship them to training. If they are not qualified to enlist, we explain why and send them on their way. If they don't qualify for the desired MOS, we give them other options and they decide to take it or leave it. Our personal opinion of whether or not they have "potential" to make it, or will fail miserably, is irrelevant to the recruiting mission.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google