I've been looking at some of the available billets for the coming AY, and have a question on the various job titles. Looking at Sector OS1 billets, job titles include "SCC COMMS", SCC CONTROLLER", and "SCC SUPERVISOR". Do these titles really have any bearing on what I am going to be doing once I get there, or am I pretty assured to be put in the pipeline to become a SAR Controller (obviously after getting COMMS Watch and Situation Watch qualed)?
Thanks

Your best bet is to contact the unit that you are looking at billets for. Each unit is different. What you put in for is probably what you will get, but you never know. At Sector San Juan we have OS1s that come straight here from other units, get qualified in COMMS and then go to SAR school. We have also pulled people from COMMS and sent them to school as well. I was an OS2 in COMMS and kept my command informed that I wanted to attend SAR school. Two people ahead of me got in trouble and two weeks later I had orders to TRACEN Yorktown.

No matter what you get, keep your entire Chain of Command informed of what you really want. You just may get it.

SCC Comms is normally OS3/OS2 billets. I have known OS1 billets to say SCC comms as well. SCC supervisor is normally only listed for OSC/OSCS billets depending on which Command Center it is. SCC Controller is usually OSC/OS1/OS2 billets in Direct Access. OSC and OSCS billets have OU comp codes under them as well so even if it says SCC SUPERVISOR you're not exempt from standing watches, you just may not stand a bunch of them. Direct Access currently says SCC COMMS for Situation Unit watchstander billets though.

More than likely, if youre reporting there as an OS2, you will qualify in comms first, then go directly to SU to qualify and stand proficiency comms watches. Or if you want to do SAR, tell them you also want to be OU qualified as well. Then if youre all 3 qualified, you would take the two top positions and stand proficiency watches (2 a month) at one of them, and be a full time watchstander for the other watch position.

We are working at standardizing billet names. The advice above is good though. Regardless of the billet name, every OS1 is expected to be able to perform as an OS1.

Thanks for the info, I just wanted to make sure that I will get the chance to become a controller regardless of what the job title is. This is the reason why I am only putting sectors down on my e-resume.

Master Chief- with all due respect for the theroy of every OS1 performing at every job an OS1 could have, i find that to be a very difficult task considering the amount of hats we are required to wear.
Although, I could not agree more with the idea of going from cuc-suc-ouc as the way of things, i still hear the song of "the needs of the guard" changing that idea to have a new member at a sector slated for the ouc position, and not having any exposure to the job or the rate for that matter come in and fail. This is what is happening at some places no matter how much we preach of what the CCM states.
Semper Gumby....

Of course there will be people that fail. We have processes for that. I do not belive that 100% of our folks are earning the actual paycheck they get. I do believe though for everyone NOT earning the paycheck they are getting, there is a person junior to them will and able to swap paychecks with them.

And of course you are right in that regard, but getting that to happen is easier said than done. to me it is not a matter of money but one of work ethics and intiative. If money is a person's sole motivation for advancement, then i feel that that person is not ready to advance. a feel that the financial part should be coupled with, i don't know, pride in what we do should be the least amount of motivation for advancement. what with SAR and EKMS being very serious business, no amount of money can buy back a life or career that was lost or ruined by a person that only have money in the forefront of their mind.
respectfully, of course Masterchief.

quote:

Originally posted by okole:
And of course you are right in that regard, but getting that to happen is easier said than done. to me it is not a matter of money but one of work ethics and intiative. If money is a person's sole motivation for advancement, then i feel that that person is not ready to advance. a feel that the financial part should be coupled with, i don't know, pride in what we do should be the least amount of motivation for advancement. what with SAR and EKMS being very serious business, no amount of money can buy back a life or career that was lost or ruined by a person that only have money in the forefront of their mind.
respectfully, of course Masterchief.

Hence that pesky little thing that pops up twice a year that requires us to (admittedly reluctantly sometimes) justify to our superiors why we should earn that lovely paycheck which hits my account every two weeks, AND if its done properly - should allow the command to evaluate whether or not you and I display the characteristics equivalent to that paycheck, and more importantly, the collar devices we put on. I won't even go into the highly controversial R / NR at the end of each evaluation which should be a tool (when used right) for the command to ensure only the proven competent can compete for the next level and continue in their current paygrade. This pesky evaluation is more than enough to determine whether or not I come to work to "keep the seat warm" or actually advance the mission of the CG.

As far as the level of qualification a typical OS1 should hold I cannot speak for any other OS1 but as for myself - it is MY RESPONSIBILITY to ensure that I am qualified at the level my command needs me to be to be effective. Yes - OS's have many hats No - I don't believe an OS1 should be able to put every hat on at a moments notice....BUT, as an OS1 I better have a darn good idea of what each hat looks like so that when it is time to put that hat on, it doesn't take me long for me to become comfortable wearing it....the only way that happens is if I take it upon myself to, maybe do more than the bare minimum in becoming an E-6. Anyway, enough with the analogies...my humble opinion on the subject.

quote:

No - I don't believe an OS1 should be able to put every hat on at a moments notice....BUT, as an OS1 I better have a darn good idea of what each hat looks like so that when it is time to put that hat on, it doesn't take me long for me to become comfortable wearing it....the only way that happens is if I take it upon myself to, maybe do more than the bare minimum in becoming an E-6. Anyway, enough with the analogies...my humble opinion on the subject.

Very well said!

quote:

what with SAR and EKMS being very serious business

OK - I have to pull this one thing out here and address it. Lumping these two thing together is ABSURD! In the scheme of things EKMS is about 157 steps further down the line of importance and negative impact as SAR. Further, it is even further down the line in complexity.

Listen folks, no matter what you may have heard from the 'old guard' folks, NO ONE, NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON, has ever had ANY serious negative career impacts from EKMS without CONTINUED, INTENTIONAL and KNOWING carelessness or criminal activity. PERIOD.

Okole - that's isnt an attack on you - just on the myth.

quote:

Originally posted by Mightyz90_93:

quote:

what with SAR and EKMS being very serious business

OK - I have to pull this one thing out here and address it. Lumping these two thing together is ABSURD! In the scheme of things EKMS is about 157 steps further down the line of importance and negative impact as SAR. Further, it is even further down the line in complexity.

Listen folks, no matter what you may have heard from the 'old guard' folks, NO ONE, NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON, has ever had ANY serious negative career impacts from EKMS without CONTINUED, INTENTIONAL and KNOWING carelessness or criminal activity. PERIOD.

Okole - that's isnt an attack on you - just on the myth.

Very true. EKMS though important - doesn't (realistically) have the potential of REAL TIME disaster potential that Search and Rescue does.

Masterchief- that most definitely sounds like an attack and that's ok with me.
You cannot say that both do not require a full time commitment, but that is beside the point i was trying to make. the point is that there are a lot of people making rank with a single-mindedness that could potentially make life difficult for themselves and others. PERIOD!
Being OS isn't so much as being a specialist in any one thing. We're expected or rather thought to have answers for the cadre during an operation. I for one find that to be flattering and best due to the confidence that the cadre may have and yet it could be intimidating for others.
i am a firm believer of the "the heat of the forge determines the strength of the steal" bit, but realisticly...there are some amoung us that cannot handle that sort of heat...but what would i know of such things? i'm just a 1st class...

Oh I can very easily say EKMS doesn't require a full time commitment. Of course, my experience is somewhat limited, only having been a Group Primary, a (different) Groups Alternate, and a Unit primary or alternate for two different units.

Anyways, the rest of your point is very well spoken. What we need to work on is shifting some Cadre expectations. There are some things that USED to be done by some folks that are third cousins, twiced removed, to the OS Rating, that we simply can not, should not and do not do now. We can not add as much as we had to our expected knowledge base, without limiting some other things. That applies even more so when the volumn of those 'other things' have grown exponetialy!

Well put Masterchief. It is a sigh of relief to know that there is a senior person that can see the difficulty that the cadre causes with old expectations.

Mightyz90_93 - I have a question. Where you an actual EKMS Account Primary Manager or just the primary of a local element? The two are very different. As a District EKMS Account Manager and ISIC, I can tell you that it is absolutely a full time commitment, even if you were to take away my ISIC duties. I can also tell you that as policies and procedures have changed over the years, the amount of responsibility placed on the EKMS Manager and Alternates has greatly increased. When was the last time you were involved in EKMS? There have been numerous changes put in place over the last several years.

I find it disconcerting that the OS rating force Master Chief would be posting something on this board stating how one job in the OS field is more important than another. What kind of message is that sending to the junior personnel who read this board? All of our jobs are equally important and should be taken seriously. To downplay something like EKMS, is to downplay the importance of National Security.

trish & Mighty:

Might be something better discussed in a Chief's Mess or off-line.

IMH "Once a Chief, Always a Chief" O

Trish;
Basically, two of each. Two actual accounts and two Local Elements.

I will surely support you that a DISTRICT Manager/ISIC is a full time job. There are TWO OSC BILLETS in the ENTIRE COAST GUARD whose billet is in those jobs. TWO. You and D17. That is it. That means that 0.7 percent of our Chief Billets are in that job. CLEARLY that means from a rating perspective, it is not a core competency. And I'll say it again, from a Rating perspective, there are several hundred OSC jobs out there MUCH more important than the two District EKMS Manager jobs. I'll shout it from the rooftops becuase I do not want the folks graduating OS A-School now to think they can or desire too grow up and be a District EKMS Manager. That would be non-sense! SNOSs need to be lookinh at growing up to be SCC Leading Chiefs and Cutter Chiefs. That is where the rating is.

...and as you alluded to, note that this discussion is about the MANAGEMENT functions, not the USER functions.

quote:

Originally posted by JerryG:
trish & Mighty:

Might be something better discussed in a Chief's Mess or off-line.

IMH "Once a Chief, Always a Chief" O

Jerry - understood the thought and that might happen too, but I think we can keep it at the right level for public consumption.

That may be what direct access states but there are many more OSCs and OS1s out there filling the EKMS Manager role(s) at Districts, as well as Sectors, Cutters, and Air Stations.
The point I'm trying to make is that EKMS is part of our job field. However big or small it may be, there are many Operation Specialists who may someday be put into a role of EKMS Manager. We can't dismiss the competency and tell people that it's not an important part of our job. Every part of our job is important. Although the job may change, it will never entirely just go away.
Unless you can somehow manage to pawn it off on the Yeoman