|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
I intend to live forever. So far, so good. |
Are you aware that the CG strength will soon be 45.5K? That should help out considerably.
Additionally, there will be 2 "4 Star's" ... The senate is recommending changing the Vice Comdt to a "4 star" position.. and, authorizing 4 "3 star" positions.. There are a few other planned changes.. Check out the 20 AUG edition of the Navy Times... Wray...  |
||
|
Straight and to the point! |
I thought this was a post about weight standards again, more personally my waist band.
EM1 |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
Do you think this means they will need more applicants for OCS for the next couple years? That would be great...
|
|||
|
| <M_Wood51>
|
For a service which has historically top heavy with Officers - probably.
Everything depends on the monitary allocation that Congress provides with the new expansion. |
||
|
Experienced Member |
Not any huge change. We wanted Vice to be a 4 star in large part so they would have parity when at DOD meetings and elsewhere in DC. A 3 star just don't carry much wieght around other services when they have a BUNCH of 4 stars.
No real extra cost until they retire anyways. |
|||
|
Experienced Member |
Then frock all the admirals to four star. |
|||
|
|
I intend to live forever. So far, so good. |
So much for that "pyramid" shape we all think of....
Maybe XO's on 378's should be Captains (0-6's) like the CO's... Wray... |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
Although the CG might be expanding, I don't think they need more officers than usual. There is actually going to be a reduction in new officers next year; there will be less OCS classes in FY08 than normal. I think at the moment, even with the higher numbers, the CG has met its junior officer staffing level requirements. If it hadn't, there would probably be more OCS classes.
|
|||
|
|
CG Forums Lead Moderator Something Wicked This Way Comes  |
So does this mean the CG will actually have more employees than the NYPD? Last I heard, their current compliment is around 41K.
T |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
I heard that the Coast Guard discharged more overweight personnel than alcoholics. CG's hurting for enlisted and bringing back retired personnel.
|
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
You heard wrong. |
|||
|
Member |
And that from a man who knows. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
I think most of the alcoholics are overweight...
 |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
1.B.1 states
Yet 1.B.2 states a uniform is optional when on Liberty. Of course, 1.B.2. also states On Duty Under Instruction a uniform is optional, but I would love to see someone test that by appearing at a TRACEN in a TEMDUIN status in civilian cloths. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
I have to ask Mark, Is the BX "public"?
Maybe these were some airdales stopping over...Or someone catching a MAC flight. I'd hate to even speculate someone might be at a giant AFB for work/meeting/Dr. Appointment... Just playing devils advocate... I hate that BX by the way. I accidently spent $200 there yesterday. |
|||
|
| <M_Wood51>
|
I donno, maybe I'm more "Old Guard" than I care to admit. Judging today's generation by yesterday's and vice versa is one of the capital errors when evaluating either historical or current events. In other words, things change.
Joe - the regs may say one thing while command perogative can say another. And in a military environment, the unit or ship's CO is one of life's last absolute authorities on anything. Just so happened that my COs were always very anal retentave concerning uniform military appearance. Still, it was a pain in the arse (plus a major time waster) for someone to have to shift into the Uniform of the Day and then back into the work uniform again two or three times per day. I had very few gripes about my career. This was one of them, especially at units in close proximity to units of other armed forces. To show up at the Post Office in SDBs only to see Navy personnel in dungarees and Army personnel in fatigues was a pisser to say the least. It appears that certain positive changes have been made in the Coast Guard, even though the ODU (to me) looks like crap on a lot of individuals. But I digress from the central topic of the thread and apologies from me are in order. Mark This message has been edited. Last edited by: <M_Wood51>, |
||
|
|
Basic Training |
This is exactly what our CMC told us generated this change. We were the only service walking around in our dress uniforms all the time. And this apparently includes headquarters. |
|||
|
|
Basic Training |
Respectfully disagree. Seems more like DOD envy to me. Don't know how much interaction w/ DOD there is at the 3- and 4-star level nowadays -- has to be more, but I can't imagine that many more policy discussions taking place now than in yesteryear. And, CG end-strength is not orders of magnitude larger, which would tend to justify an additional 4-star to manage the organization. CNO is a member of the JCS, and his time is therefore split between managing the USN as an institution, and in managing military policy through co-management of the Joint Staff. Comdt has none of those additional statutory responsibilities, not even the Interdiction Coordinator duties he had back when I was on active duty. Little to no justification for this on a workload basis. This will be more costly since it means one additional 4-star salary plus one more 3-star billet with quarters and associated staff retinue (driver, LT billet as aide v. a collateral or re-programmed aide for 2-star commands, etc.) We all know that a 2-star billet will not be eliminated as a budget offset. In my cynical view, this is to create the first female 4-star. Have nothing against the Vice - she is a fine officer and a friend. But this is not necessary on the merits. Furthermore, this will create the potential for a same-grade institutional rival to the Comdt. I've heard rumors for years of flag-mess infighting amongst strong-minded and strong-willed 3- and 4-stars. We do not need to stoke that potential with two essentially co-Commandants. Many reasons to be against this, and few to be for it. But I note that this is provided for in both House and Senate versions of the CG Authorization Bill, so it will probably go through. Sigh. Shipdriver |
|||
|
Member |
CAPT, Do you think this might be the first real push in an effort to get full time USCG representation on the JCS? |
|||
|
| Previous Topic | Next Topic | powered by eve community | Page 1 2 3 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
|||
| Site | Military.com Forums | ||
| Servlet | eve1da047 | ||
| Version | 1.2.22 build 9062 | ||
| Module | Forums 4.0.3 | ||
| Stylesheet | "Front Door" | ||
| Wordlet Set | "Default Wordlet Set" | ||
|
| View $GS_USERNAME's Public Profile |
| View $GS_USERNAME's Personal Zone Page |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Buddies |
| Add $GS_USERNAME to my Ignore List |
| Invite $GS_USERNAME to a Private Topic |
| View Recent Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
| Notify me of New Posts by $GS_USERNAME |
