|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
New Member |
In my opinion there is ALOT of room for improvement concerning the advancement "system".
I'm all for EPQ's/EPME/EOCTS/SWE's and the additional requirements such as TIR. But what I would like to see change is how people are advanced to E-7 and above. You compare one 1st class who wrote a great score on the SWE, Great marks but is short on award points, sea points, TIS is less likely to be advanced compared to a 1st class with a lower SWE score, lower marks but with higher sea points, award points and TIS (TIR however is a great thing to consider if a person is experienced enough for E-7)My problem is simply this, is the CG advancing people who try for longer or try harder? Is the message to wait for it or to earn it thru knowledge and performance(applying that knowledge)E-7 and above should be screened and selected for advancement by a board of E-7 and above based on performance(including awards earned) in their current paygrade, SWE score and TIR and overall ability to perform as a Chief and not how long you've been trying or what platform the CG assign you to. It should be HQ says they need 25 DCC's, a panel should select from the top SWE results out of all who sat and select the 25 based on Performance factor, TIR, Awards and qualifications attained and overall chief potential. |
||
|
|
New Member |
So, do you have any idea how much labor your idea would actually involve?
I spent quite a few years subject to the enlisted advancement system, and while it's not perfect, it's about as good as you're going to get. Yes, longevity gets rewarded. However, so do high marks for people who might earn them through brown nosing rather than strong performance. Advancements have a lot of moving parts, and we don't have the luxury of all that staff lying around ready to sit a bunch of panels for E-7 through E-9. If we were the size of the Navy, there'd be an economy of scale, and we might be able to staff it properly. With our ~42000 active duty work force, there's just not enough justification to implement a panel process. Just do like everybody else has done and keep working at it. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
I was in the Navy from 1976-1980 and did a tour at a Navy facility as a CG Liaison in the 90's and saw how biased the board process was for E-7. It made me feel very glad I was not part of that scam any longer. It is true that in the CG, depending on the rate, it may be slow to move up the ranks but with hard work and hitting the various manuals it is doable. In the CG you get promoted by your merits (good SWE, marks, TIG, TIS, etc.)and not by popularity contest with the board members.
|
|||
|
Experienced Member |
Before making that assumption, know this 1 more question right= 6 MOs TIR= 1 Year TIS= 1 Award pt= 6 MOs Sea time= ~5 point total increase in marks avg (This applies less and less towards Senior Grades when a lot of the factors get maxed and the score has more of an effect) |
|||
|
|
Member |
It sounds like you were a first class that took the service wide and didn't make the cut. (maybe not)
I feel that the Coast Guard Advancement System is head and shoulders above any of the other services. Is it perfect? probably not. You could say, if I had more time in service I would have made it. On the same hand you could say, if I would have gotten one or two more questions right I would have made it. It's easy to blame the system. but is also a good idea to take a quick peek in the mirror once in a while. The real beauty of the Coast Guard system is that you live or die by your own merits. Take responsibility for your own actions, and do better next time around. Good luck. Dave |
|||
|
|
New Member |
I agree with dduren. If you want to advance, study hard and get a good score on the SWE. I've seen guys with plenty of other points and still not advance b/c they did not do good on the SWE. I also agree that it sounds like someone who did not make the cut. I can say that b/c I was in those shoes for 3 SWE's but it was my own fault for not studying and yes, I complained about the system until I woke up and took action. I'd rather have this system instead of the other sevices anyway. Why sit in front of a board that does not even know you and let them determine your fate. What if they just dont feel like approving you that day. Atleast with the CG, if your above the cut, you are guarantteed to promote. Just my 2 cents.
|
|||
|
Experienced Member |
DC1,
Do you remember that exercise called EAST REPORT, the Enlisted Advancement Study Team. Correlating that report into four basic catagories, Knowledge (SWE), Experience (Sea/surf, TIS, TIG), EPEF, and Awards, you could be complaining about a very different the advacement system.  Be careful for what you wish for. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
Thanks to all for your replies, And Yes I am a 1st class who actually will not make the cut unless the go REAL deep. I agree with alot of the replies, the CG system is better than some but I think alot more should go into WHO becomes chiefs and above. You are selected for warrant, OCS, and other programs, I simply think the same should go for E-7 and above.
|
|||
|
Member |
The only thing I would like to see, is the SWE count for a little more. When it comes to subjective things such as awards and marks, I personally have a hard time seeing those counted towards advancing. We have all been there. We have all seen people get awards, and your left scratching your head thinking, how did he pull that off. Same thing with marks.
|
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
DC1;
Not too sure how much more we could do. COs ROUTINELY proove that they have not read the PERSMAN when it comes to evals. If they did, your thought would be taken care of. No need to change the procedures, just enforce them. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
Roger that MC |
|||
|
|
New Member |
The CWO selection process is PFM, I much more enjoyed being in control of my own advancements- study and wrote #1, advanced. Not subject to a board with Lord knows what selection criteria- can't prepare, no results on "how you did", just variable scale for pre-board and then poof, your name on a list. CWO A |
|||
|
Member |
In my opinion, the CG has the best advancement system I've ever seen. Nothing is ever perfect, but I've never seen anything else that compares to the CG's system. It rewards hard work and determination along with personal sacrifices made by choosing difficult duty assignments.
|
|||
|
|
Member |
Yeah, today it's PFM but not too awful long ago you took an exam for warrant and your exam score factored significantly in the selection process. As I recall candidates were initially ranked on the basis of their exam score, time in grade and CO's recommendation. The selection board could then move you up or down the list based on their deliberations, but there were limits as to how many places you could be moved. If you wrote near the top on the exam and had a solid recommendation you were in like Flynn. I can't imagine what they look for today. It's been gone fifteen years or more now and I've still not heard a logical expanation for the elimination of the old WOSB. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
Chiefs are selected, on merit (awards), performance (evals), experience (TIS, TIR, Sea time), and knowledge (SWE). That looks pretty selective to me. Those are all aspects of the job. If you are lacking in one you can always make up for it another, the SWE being the biggest one you control. You also have some control over your marks. When you turn in your supporting documentation how many pages do you have? Notice I said pages not what was on THE PAGE. Your post gives the impression that you are slightly bitter that you did not make the cut for Chief. If this is so take a look at the reasons you did not make the cut. What areas are you lacking and what can YOU do to change it. Are you writing up good supporting documentation for your marks? Are you doing things to actually help your marks. Do you volunteer outside of work? Do you take on projects not expected for your paygrade? Do you seek out additional responsibilities? These here not only help your marks but also can lead to award points. For the SWE, how much did you study. Did you actually look up each praq or did you study someone else's gouge? If you really want to advance start studying months before the test. Throw out anything you did not find yourself. Look up every praq and understand it. You must dedicate yourself to advancing if you want to advance. I have seen many cases were junior people have made the cut by scoring well on the SWE but I have just seen a case were the #1 test taker was knocked out of contention. You can only make up for so much but then again if you have that much to make up, you may not be ready. Good luck next time, AKFly |
|||
|
|
armycwo@gmail.com Moderator HT/VI ---------------------  Founding Member --------------------- The Love of my life:  |
Mightyz90_93, Hey master Chief, I was wondering if I had shared this picture taken at Lackland AF BMT graduation the end of May. Our fly girl in now midway through 4NO school at Shepard AFT. It is times like these that an old man with grown grandchildren makes life wonderful. I'm just crazy in love with girls in blue uniforms.
 Thanks for letting me share. Take care Bruce Love OldArmyLove A listening ear, a caring heart, an open mind and an extended hand may be all I can offer, but it is yours without charge or Judgment. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Pretty cool there sir!
|
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Thirty some odd years ago, there was a test to compete for warrant, the CWOB, Chief Warrants Officer Battery. Many have postulated theories on why the testing was dropped. During that time, you only had to be on the CPO Advancement List to take the exam ... with the CO's recommendation of course. They stopped the test sometime in the mid 80s. Then they changed the rules of the game so you had to be in the top 50 percent of the CPO Advancement list to be eligible for the CWO boards. Many years ago, even the Officers had promotion tests. I only have a couple of words of advice for those competing in the SWE ...
Now, listen to your IPOD or similiar device while your doing chores. The Learning law called The Law of Exercise, will ensure your retention will be such that you will score very well on the test. Using the core of that protocal, I was able to score a 92 on a Tax Preparation exam. And in case you're wondering, my name was pulled from the SCPO list just prior to my advancement cuz I was a bad boy. |
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
Gee - I find that SO HARD to believe!  The only thing I would change above - and I would say it is HUGE, would be DO NOT, I repeat DO NOT 'build your own' library. ALWAYS and for everything (you can) go driectly to one of the approved online sources. PUBS change too quickly and the test measures your knowledge on the DAY OF THE EXAM, not when you put together your library. The rest seems to be great stuff. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
108 should prove that i studied, I studied my own material and flash cards etc., marks 43, sea time 4.8 years, Awards 5, TIS 9.5 years, TIR 3 yrs. Bitter is not the word, The reason i started this discussion is because of alot of people that fall thru the cracks who have no business being Chiefs are unfortunalely somehow still being promoted NOT selected. And i know there are plenty of people who agree the system is although better than other services, still in need of becoming better. |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community | Page 1 2 3 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
