quote:

Originally posted by J_W_B:

quote:

Originally posted by MarkLF:

quote:

Originally posted by Mightyz90_93:
wow, lots of things there.

Should every E-9 be able to fill any Silver badge? IMO - yes

Should every E-9 be able to fill a GB? IMO - tough call. In a perfect world, maybe.

I don't claim that every BMC recomended for advancement should be able to do an OinC job. It is a requirement in the PERSMAN.

You aren't trying to argue than an Ensign and the billets they have is a step up from MCPO, are you? If you are, you are probably one of three people in the world that would.

As far as MCPO to CWO2 - start with reading what the Bosun (hint - a CWO) posted above. Now, if you allowed a MCPO to go to CWO4, might be a different conversation.

folks who make MC under 20 - same comments apply about stepping up. Now if you read my comments above, I am fully ready to keep stepping up. The AO made it alittle difficult by giving me ORDERS to fill the Senior Most E-9 job in my rating when I was an E-8 with 15 years in. I'll be happy to put my name on any board.

As far as MK1Mod0 billets, I'll explain with examples! There are two OSCM billets here in the DC Area. One is a watch supervisor position at NAVCEN. Although the person is normally chosen by the CO to be the collateral duty CMC, the billet is not designated as such. That would be a MK1Mod0 MCPO billet. The RFMC, the Non-Res Training MC, the Res Training MC and the Stan Team MC would be the 'stepping up' billets for my Rating. The rest would be MK1Mod0 billets. I believe it would be reasonable to say if you are on your second tour as a OSCM, and desire to continue serving (and hence greatly increasing your reitrement pay and current pay), you should be ready, willing and able to step into those positions!

(Or, they could step up into full time Silver/Gold positions)

(See how long it takes for one of those OSCMs to dial my phone number now! Standing by...)

While I admire the fact that you take pride in your position it does appear that your pride is clouding your vision.
You asked; "You aren't trying to argue than an Ensign and the billets they have is a step up from MCPO, are you? "

I am not saying that, THE COAST GUARD IS SAYING THAT!!!! Like it or not the lowest ranking officer is still a "higher position" the the most senior enlisted! They are after all officers and that puts them in a "higher" position then "enlisted". Now do they hold a position of "greater responsibility"? I will concede that they have a "different" level of responsibility and that in some way in is not equal to that of a E-9 but in truth is not "equal" to some positions held by E-4s. For example as an E-4 I was a qualified coxswain, as such I was entirely responsible for the completion of my mission and the safety of my crew. It was not unusual for the Ensign assigned to the group to come and get underway with me during visits to our station. On board the 41 or 44 I my position was much "higher" in responsibility then was the ensigns but I am not trying to claim that because of that, going from E-4 to O-1 is a "step down".

As for your OSCM billet "seniority" argument I would expect that your phone is probably ringing so I'll let you go answer it . But remember the same CG that decided that needed your billet to be E-9 also decided they needed that NAVCEN billet to be E-9 so it seems that both billets are equal! There is only one E-9 billet that is considered to "higher" then any other and that is why it is designated to be
"E-9 with special pay".

Marklf

With all due respect - I seem to recall many times the white eyed fear of an Ensign or LTjg when they knew the COB/CMC was on a war hunt for them. I also remember seeing the fear of a certain LT when asked to step into the Chief's mess by a certain MC. But I definitely do not recall any of the reverse, or expect to.

The fear exhibited by the Junior Officers in the situations you described does not change the fact that they are in a "higher position" then the MC or the COB/CMC. All that "fear" indicates is that, regardless of their "higher position" they are smart enough to know they are not as experienced as their senior enlisted are and that if they have done something to make the Chiefs upset they had best rectify that situation and learn from it. And yes I have seen a MC put very squarely in his place by a JO when the MC crossed the "line".

Marklf

Just saw a email passed down through the Chiefs network from the MCPOCG stating this rumor is false.

Not comfortable posting the MCPOCG's email, if any one wants more info ask a Chief.

Command Senior Chief saw no issue with it so heres the email from the MCPOCG.

"All,

Rumors have been gaining steam in the workforce regarding the re-activation of the High Year Tenure policy. Those rumors are false. There will be no re-activation of the High Year Tenure policy either now or in the foreseeable future. Please pass this to your people and help quell this rumor.

I believe the rumors may be coming from the fact that there is a workgroup within Cg-1 that is looking at how we might change the High Year Tenure policy to make it more effective if we needed it as a workforce tool sometime in the future. CG-1 has been looking at how the policy might be changed on and off since 2006... so this is really nothing new. I personally support this effort because if we were ever to have to implement some form of High Year Tenure again I don't want to default to the current policy still on the books because it is strictly based on time in service. I strongly believe that performance and possibly other factors should also be considered in any type of High Year Tenure policy.

However, I want to again reiterate... There will be no re-activation of the High Year Tenure policy either now or in the foreseeable future. Nor is it being considered for re-activation.

MCPOCG Bowen"

If only MCPO Bowen could be the next Commandant.

sorry for what i have posted and if i offended anyone i am sorry that i did.

Very Respectfully,
FN

This message has been edited. Last edited by: southern118,

Why are you worried about this?

Take control of your life... start taking SWE's and don't worry about the others.

Wray...

if i could take a SWE i would i am waiting on A school and already have all my EPME done and most of my signoffs for e-5 done jsut a few i cant get here

Great, what A school?

quote:

The RFMC, the Non-Res Training MC, the Res Training MC and the Stan Team MC would be the 'stepping up' billets for my Rating. The rest would be MK1Mod0 billets.

If all E9 billets within a particular rating aren't considered equal in terms of the knowledge, skills and abilities required to discharge the duties and resposibilities of those positions, then shouldn't the "MK1Mod0" E9 billets rightfully be E8 billets? An uninformed but logical person might conclude from your argument that the OS rating has too many E-9 billets.

Also, if E9 billets are at 1.25% of enlisted strength, why aren't those E9 billets equally distributed across all of the ratings (i.e., five E9 billets for every 400 billets within each rating), and as that's not the case, which ratings are the winners and the losers in the E9 sweepstakes?

quote:

...the Non-Res Training MC...would be the 'stepping up' billets for my Rating. The rest would be MK1Mod0 billets. I believe it would be reasonable to say if you are on your second tour as a OSCM, and desire to continue serving (and hence greatly increasing your reitrement pay and current pay), you should be ready, willing and able to step into those positions!

MC: Brings to mind the occasion when three then SSCMs elected to retire rather that accept orders as the non-res MCPO. Needless to say, there was a brief flurry of SS advancements at a time when that rating was tight. Your 'up or out' proposal just might serve as a modified form of HYT. Is that what MCPOCG Bowen is looking for?

v/r - jb

quote:

OK first thing first.

im just a nonrate

Southern118

Just a little suggestion, if I may.

Don't ever think "I'm just a nonrate". You are a non rated member of the CG. No particular rating (trade) assigned. Every enlisted shipmate started out in those first 3 paygrades. Over the last 30 years. the term "nonrate""norate" has jumped into official usage. The grades E-1,E-2 & E-3 are in fact considered RATES. Check the manuals. You are non rated, but do have a rate. But that is another argument.

Anyway, when you have your present rate under your belt, take each and every chance for advancement in rate that comes your way.

Interesting how policies change over the years. At one time hash mark Seamen/Fireman weren't uncommon, then I believe in the very early 1970s you had to be a petty officer to re-enlist. Who knows now.

quote:

Every enlisted shipmate started out in those first 3 paygrades.

Not just a few commissioned shipmates started out in those first 3 paygrades too.

Indeed, my error.

The Seaman/Fireman is starting out from a very distinguished stock.

quote:

Originally posted by Wray:
Great, what A school?

MC

i am on the MST a school list.

Mastermate,

i know what you are saying i was just throwing it out there becuase there is so many chiefs in this conversation. i have no problem with waiting but he will be looking at least 7 years before he ever can pin 3rd on. If he had been trying to begin with i wouldnt have a problem with it. but he really has no motivation to do much. he is very comfy. i am ready to go to school so i can pin third adn get on with my career to support my wife and kids.

Respectfully
FN

quote:

Originally posted by Anusaurus_Rex:

quote:

The RFMC, the Non-Res Training MC, the Res Training MC and the Stan Team MC would be the 'stepping up' billets for my Rating. The rest would be MK1Mod0 billets.

If all E9 billets within a particular rating aren't considered equal in terms of the knowledge, skills and abilities required to discharge the duties and resposibilities of those positions, then shouldn't the "MK1Mod0" E9 billets rightfully be E8 billets? An uninformed but logical person might conclude from your argument that the OS rating has too many E-9 billets.

Also, if E9 billets are at 1.25% of enlisted strength, why aren't those E9 billets equally distributed across all of the ratings (i.e., five E9 billets for every 400 billets within each rating), and as that's not the case, which ratings are the winners and the losers in the E9 sweepstakes?

I'll answer the second question first. 1.25% is mandated across the entire service. Just to start, there are dozens of 'out of rating' type billets for E-9s. (ie CMCs) That would limit the % of in rating billets.

As for my rating, we actually have the lowest % of E-9 billets of any rating. There are a lot of reasons this happens, but mostly it is growth at the junior level that was not accompanied by growth at the senior levels. There are a lot of folks involved in adding billets to the CG, most important of all is Congress. We don't always get the numbers we need at each paygrade.

As far as comparing the billets, it is not as much KSAs (Knowledge, skills and abilities) as it is overall responsibilities and impact. This is something that happens at all paygrades in some part. Just think back to the 'leading seaman.' That of course is at a much smaller scale, but still a start to thinking about.

Now, I can probably come up with a list of E-9 billets that 'could' be done by an E-8. That said, one of the many strings involved is strength pyramid. We often make the decision that although a job could be done with an E-8, the rating pyramid needs more E-9s. (You can push that down to any paygrade.) So yes, in some narrower ways of looking at it, it could be said that we have both too many and not enough OSCM billets.

Remember, this discussion started because someone asked about 'E-9s who aquire 10 years time in grade.' I am just discussing ways that could be applied to E-9s. It is much more likely that someone who makes E-9 early enough to be able to gets 10 years TIG would remain proactive in seeking more challanging jobs, but there is the possibility that a person who makes E-9 in the 15-20 years time frame could go ROAD as soon as the make it. I have no problem myself with putting a program in place to attempt to prevent that.

quote:

Originally posted by HonoraryMCPO:

quote:

...the Non-Res Training MC...would be the 'stepping up' billets for my Rating. The rest would be MK1Mod0 billets. I believe it would be reasonable to say if you are on your second tour as a OSCM, and desire to continue serving (and hence greatly increasing your reitrement pay and current pay), you should be ready, willing and able to step into those positions!

MC: Brings to mind the occasion when three then SSCMs elected to retire rather that accept orders as the non-res MCPO. Needless to say, there was a brief flurry of SS advancements at a time when that rating was tight. Your 'up or out' proposal just might serve as a modified form of HYT. Is that what MCPOCG Bowen is looking for?

v/r - jb

As quoted in his email above, the MCPO-CG isn't looking for anything that I know of. Anything I said is just my own ramblings and not representative of any of his thoughts, discussions or ideas. Just as he has said, I have heard no official discussions or even hints that ANYTHING is in the future.

quote:

CG-1 has been looking at how the policy might be changed on and off since 2006... so this is really nothing new. I personally support this effort because if we were ever to have to implement some form of High Year Tenure again I don't want to default to the current policy still on the books because it is strictly based on time in service.

MC: My apologies for misinterpreting the above passage from his email.

v/r - jb

No problem...

Yeah that is just routine HQ stuff there. I think the first time I remember being on a working group for that was 2 or 3 years ago. Well before any time when budget conerns were high. I am sure it has been going on and off for years before that.

With a majority of the workforce not even knowing what HYT or a PGP is, turning it back on in it's current form would not be the best tact.