I would agree with IBIS73, I have done my part and will continue to do it again, and I love it. I/D is completely rewarding and great for a career. The thing I still see happening is the see to shore ratio, I am going to stay underway if I can but I know I will want to go to land some time.
Sea to shore ratio. For example, its pretty bad when a BM needs ONE YEAR seatime to test for CPO, but an FS needs THREE. Good thing is, we usually get that out of the way after "A" school. And for your all you salty dogs that will want to bash me and say "you joined a sea going service!... " well, DUH!, but I did NOT join the NAVY. I would replace the civilains at Cape May and most everywhere else, A76 pretty much screwed the FS' out of alot of sand billets. And as for the Independent Duty thing, it was the hardest thing I ever done, but also the most prepared for, thanks to "C" school in Petaluma and SCPO Mark Adams (missed). nuff' said.
Originally posted by IBIS73: Independent Duty FSO's. It seems either FS's don't want to do the job or some FS's are to young for the job and end up getting in trouble.
How can you be too young for the job? If you completed the course and demonstrated the knowledge for the advancement to FS2 how can you be too young? Of course if someone just signed the stuff off then that would be a problem.
CDR; In my experience, it's not the 'knoweldge' things that get half arsed signed off. It is that very last box on the EERs that gets half arse. You have either heard (or maybe, just maybe even used) some of the weak arse excusses for not giving the person the correct R or N mark they deserve. Way to many COMMAND CADRE think they know better than the PERSMAN and insist on negative counseling, PG 7s, and Article 15s before they 'allow' a Not Rec on a set of marks. The way people are normally to young is that their experience in years does not add up to what it should. Many times the Chief knows that and says they don't think the person, say an FS3, could handle the job of an FS2 from a responsibility and maturity level. Too many commands refuse to put not recomended without a pile of negative info, when they should be looking for a pile of positive info before they recomend!
I'm gonna go against the grain and say it isn't the maturity or age of the ID cook. It is the training.
When I took the Paperwork course it had VERY little to do with ID. This is the biggest issue for people messing up at ID, in my opinion. I got to my first ID position at a decommed 123 and when we commissioned her I was $1800 in the hole and I had yet to stand in the galley. We had nothing on the inventory and there wasn't even so much a bag of chips. This was a huge cluster, and my training didn't help me out at all.
I knew the manual, but had never put it to practice. I was able to get out of that within a month. Even with a crew living onboard for 3 months eating every meal onboard. My training for paperwork school didn't do squat for ID.
I think there should be a very specific course for ID. It doesn't need to be long, but it should be completely separate from the regular course to prevent confusion for new ID cooks.
I think the cooks get blammed too much. Don't get me wrong I know that not all the ID cooks are innocent, but I think better, specific training would vastly improve this problem.
You can't really blame it on the "C" school training. I feel every cook should be prepared for ID by his supervisors. I went to "C" school in 98' and I really did not need it, I went cause I was told I needed it. I was already doing all of the paperwork for perpetual and PvsA seemed so simple. The cook side of it is not the biggest problem for ID, its all of the coloaterals that go with it. So here is the picture- You have a Master Chief on a PB, his cook transfers that has 10 years in that was not only the FSO but also the MAA, BO, WEPO, EMT and Asst. Training Officer. The Master Chief gets a FS2 who has 3(first termer) years in the Guard. He will go on Direct Access and will very upset. Now here is where age of a ID FSO comes into play. If he had more time in he would be seasoned, probably having a couple of Qual. codes under his belt. So if the command gives him a couple of coloaterals on top of the FSO duties most of the time the FS2 with not very much time in will not be able to handle it. Independent Duty is much more than just cooking and paperwork management. I got my first ID job when I had 6 years in and now I have 8 years of ID afloat.
I understand what your saying, but FS's aren't getting in trouble because they don't know the collaterals. They are getting in trouble because they don't know the paperwork. That is the biggest issue that FSAT has with them. I had tons of collaterals, but that didn't affect my galley work. The complaint I am bringing up for ID is the paperwork aspect because this topic was about problems facing the FS's. Paperwork is and has always been a problem on ID units. FSAT has said this over and over.
PVA is very simple, but many FSO's don't seem to teach their FS2's how the process works. They often say, "Put these numbers on this form and these on that form..." But never really teach them how they affect each other. All I'm saying is that the course could get into that stuff. I know it is part of our pracs, but many FSO's don't seem to be teaching the jr. FS's the importance of UNDERSTANDING what is going on. Sure people can fill out the forms, but what happens when the numbers don't add up? If we teach them how to understand the equations better they will be able to correct their own mistakes instead of getting reports returned from FINCEN.
Allow me to throw a thought in here please. How about a school or some other type of training for the ID FSs supervisor? As a former QM1 on a 110, the cook worked for me. Luckily, the first one was a great Coastie, and I had an interest. I ended up knowing a lot more than I wanted too, especially after he PCSd. The very first end of month report with the new cook was a mess. We ended up about 17% in the red. The XO demanded that we get to 8-10% in the black in two months. I knew just enough to catch that part of the issue was how the inventory was done. One cook counted an open bag of chips with one chip missing as being on board, the other one counted it as being eaten. I din't know what was right, just new that that made a huge difference. We also had problems with the XO not wanting to pay his share and the first cook was able to teach me enough to help get his back.
anyways, just a thought to get the FS some backup. Team CG shouldn't allow us to think of anybody as truely ID!
I have a problem with the fact that there are XO's, OInC's, and other "not FS" supervisors trying to manage the budget for the FSO. I believe there should be about 6 more FSAT billets at the top end to spend more time (whether they like it or not) with the FS2's at these ID billets. I have a real problem working for someone who is not my rating and knows little more than what they saw on the powerpoint presentation at XPO school about my job but feels they are now an instant expert on the ins and outs of pva. If there were more FSAT billets, the FSC's would be able to travel out and dig into the records more to help these guys/gals possibly prevent disaster. We all know most of the FS dilemas don't just happen, they build up over a 3-12 month period and it all comes to light when FSAT visits or it just can't be hidden anymore on paper. Most of these things are preventable. There are too many FS2's out there who are scared to call FSAT for simple questions so they ask their "supervisor" who could surely teach them rapid radar plotting or how to determine set and drift but probably is not the "expert" on how to work the galley out of a potential problem by shopping smarter or using a different vendor or possibly using prime vendor. Much more training should be given to junior FS's. And I don't mean available training, I mean MANDATORY training. Only then, I believe, can you really hold them accountable as FSO's. Until then, you should give the FSO title to the XO or BM1.
Much more training should be given to junior FS's. And I don't mean available training, I mean MANDATORY training. Only then, I believe, can you really hold them accountable as FSO's. Until then, you should give the FSO title to the XO or BM1.
Well it might be a problem to "give the FSO title" to the BM1
COMDTINST M4061 states:
Designation. The CO or OINC designates and lists an FSO’s duties in writing, as required by the United States Coast Guard Regulations 1992, COMDTINST M5000.3 (series). The CO or OINC may select an officer or FS (pay grade E-5 and above); an FS designated FSO continues to provide on-the-job training to junior FSs. The CO or OINC retains duties not specifically detailed to the FSO.
So unless you have an officer to assign an OINC can only designate the FS as the FSO or keep the title himself.
When I was a Group Supply Officer myself or the FSC visited the units on a regular basis to check on the FS paperwork. Perhaps someone should find the funding and have the Senior FS in the area do routine visits to the ID FS's.
Grover; I hope you didn't take my post as thinking I wanted someone else to manage the account or teach the FSO. I was just saying having an understanding of more of what was happening would be better. Some things are simple. If the XO understands how piping liberty 15 minutes before the noon meal on trop hours vice after can mean the difference between butt steak and filet mignion on Friday, everyone can benifit. If she understands that the enlisted folks pay for 90-93 meals a month, whether they eat them or not, they will feel better out having to pay the 'coffee fee.' They also will better understand that it is the ENLISTED CREWS MONEY on the galley spreadsheets, not the boats money or the 'govts' money. Everyone has a boss, even the FSO. The command cadre is affected as much by mismanagement as any FSO. More importantly, the crew can be most affected.
I think the biggest issue facing the rate is manpower. Simply put, we need more billets. FS's put in their hours, at some double and triple the hours are spent at a unit than most other rates. (I know, I know, that's part of the job description but still.)
The Sea to Shore ratio I could care less about. I fully expect to be out on a cutter, and to tell you the truth I would rather it that way. But face the facts, we are always below full staff precentage at the 2nd Class level... adding billets (as has been discussed) at TRACEN Yorktown & TRACEN Cape May aren't going to do **** for us if we don't have the people to put in the billets.
I find that most FS's get out after their first enlistment because they get the impression that we are over worked, underpayed, and way underappreciated. For the most part they are right too.
We need more FS's.
As for another issue, we need more training. There isn't enough available in house.
I didn't mean to literally give the FSO to someone else, I'm just frustrated that so many years have passed with junior FS's being so undertrained to fill the FSO positions they are put into. I know a lot of responsibility falls on the senior FS and I guarantee the people under me will know their stuff when they leave my galley. And I'm not trying to put down the BM's or XO's who the FSO may work for. I'm not saying the FSO should not be held accountable to someone. I'm saying our job is very specialized and experienced advice will prove much more useful to these junior FSO's than referencing COMDTINST.
The FS has to want to learn to do the job (paperwork) and not just take off when liberty is granted. I personally don't want to see more billets at FSAT, that will just take away more billets from the field. I agree w/ Master Chief, we should NOT endorse any FS's that we feel are not quite ready for ID and I know it happens a lot. We have to think of character issues as much as paperwork issues. Until then the some of the FS1's, that need more sea time(60% sea), that are on land will need to fill FS2 billets. I tried to stay at my last 87(extend as a FS1) and the detailer told me no, then sent me to a River Tender which is also ID but billeted for a FS1. The guy that relieved me on the 87 got kicked off the boat for non related FS issues (sleeping on watch....twice, he 23). I think we need a little billet restructuring for our ID afloat jobs, make them half FS1 jobs and half FS2 jobs.
The single most important issue facing us today is kind of like that diagram of the FS paperwork flow that is floating around. It's a giant rats nest with everything connecting to each other. Haha.
In the spirit of the question, the single most important issue is: bodies. I don't think we need more bodies to create more billets but to have bodies to shore up and fill the gaps with the billets we already have (creating more billets is always a bonus, though).
More bodies affects the ID system as well. There was a complaint about the inexperience of our ID FS's. More bodies in our rating would bring back the SWE, effectively slowing down the rate of advancement therefore making it more competitive.
