Anyone other than me think there might have been a mistake made?

ALCGENL 134/07
SUBJ: MAY 2007 SERVICEWIDE EXAM CUTOFFS
A. CGPC LTR 1430 OF 29 JUN 07 (MAY 07 SWE)
1. ENLISTED CUTOFFS ARE DESIGNED FOR PLANNING AND GUARANTEE
ADVANCEMENTS TO THOSE MEMBERS AT/ABOVE THE CUTOFF, BASED ON
PROJECTED VACANCIES DURING A SPECIFIC PERIOD OF ELIGIBILITY.
ADVANCEMENTS OCCUR BASED ON ACTUAL VACANCIES IRRESPECTIVE OF THE
CUTOFF. THOSE NOT ADVANCED, BUT AT/ABOVE THE CUTOFF AT THE END OF
THE CYCLE, ARE CARRIED OVER TO THE NEXT SWE ELIGIBILITY LIST.
2. PERSONNEL ARE REMINDED THAT THE CO'S RECOMMENDATION FOR
ADVANCEMENT MUST BE MAINTAINED FOR THE PERIOD FROM RECOMMENDATION
TO ADVANCEMENT. PERSONNEL FAILING TO MAINTAIN THE CO'S
RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS PERIOD SHALL BE INVALIDATED FROM THE SWE(S)
THEY PARTICIPATED. PERSONNEL WHO HAVE BEEN INVALIDATED MUST BE
RECOMMENDED AND QUALIFY AGAIN THROUGH A NEW SWE COMPETITION.
3. ALL RATINGS/PAY GRADES IDENTIFIED IN REF B ARE LISTED. IN
SITUATIONS WHERE THE SWE LIST OF CANDIDATES HAS ALREADY BEEN
CLEARED, "EXHAUSTED" IS SHOWN FOR THE NAME. IN SITUATIONS WHERE
THE SWE HAS BEEN WAIVED AND A SUPPLEMENTAL LIST IS BEING
MAINTAINED, "SUP LIST" IS SHOWN FOR THE NAME.
4. THE INFORMATION BELOW PROVIDES THE NAME OF THE PERSON AT THE
CUTOFF POSITION FOR THE RESPECTIVE RATING FOR THE MAY 2007 SWE, REF
A.
------------------------------------------------------------------
RATE NAME RATE NAME RATE NAME
------------------------------------------------------------------
AETCM YORK,R.S. AMTCM 0 ASTCM 0
AETCS 0 AMTCS 0 ASTCS 0
AETC GREER,W.R. AMTC KLUYBER,C.M. ASTC MCCLURE,R.W.
AET1 0 AMT1 JIMENEZ,E. AST1 0
AET2 EXHAUSTED AMT2 BERG,I.D. AST2 0
BMCM 0 DCCM JEFFRIES,R.W. EMCM 0
BMCS MITERKO,D.J. DCCS BIDDLE,W.D. EMCS 0
BMC BULLOCK,C.D. DCC MASON,L.J. EMC MORRA,D.A.
BM1 PERE,C.B. DC1 WOODWARD,C.G. EM1 EXHAUSTED
BM2 SUP LIST DC2 SUP LIST EM2 EXHAUSTED
ETCM KOONS,R.R. FSCM 0 GMCM 0
ETCS COOPER,D.M. FSCS 0 GMCS CLARIN,J.D.
ETC ROGERS,J.B. FSC PRIOR,M.A. GMC SCHUETTE,D.M.
ET1 FLEMING,B.C. FS1 INGRAM,B.H. GM1 SUP LIST
ET2 SUP LIST FS2 SUP LIST GM2 JACKSON,D.J.
HSCM 0 ITCM 0 MKCM BODLEY,W.H.
HSCS HERRERA,J ITCS WHITE,U.D. MKCS RONCHETTI,J.
HSC PETTIS,D.D. ITC BLOXOM,S.H. MKC KANE,C.D.
HS1 LAWSON,D.R. IT1 WEPPLER,J.R. MK1 WEST,D.L.
HS2 YEAGLEY,P.A. IT2 EXHAUSTED MK2 HALL,S.R.
MSTCM 0 OSCM WHITSON,D.R. PACM 0
MSTCS 0 OSCS 0 PACS 0
MSTC TAYLOR,P.S. OSC 0 PAC SAYLOR,C.M.
MST1 PARRINGTON,K.J. OS1 0 PA1 SUP LIST
MST2 STANEART,W.C. OS2 0 PA2 SUP LIST
SKCM 0 YNCM 0
SKCS JONES,W.T. YNCS 0
SKC SIDLO,C.D. YNC BLEVINS,D.T.
SK1 PEREIRA,M.L. YN1 0
SK2 MESEN,C.P. YN2 0
------------------------------------------------------------------
5. THE RANK ORDER NUMBER FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL IDENTIFIED FOR
ADVANCEMENT IS NO LONGER INDICATED. THE RANK ORDER NUMBER CAN BE
FOUND AT THE PERSONNEL SERVICE CENTER'S WEB SITE
HTTP://CGWEB.PSC.USCG.MIL/ADV.HTM.
6. PERSONNEL WHO APPEAR ABOVE THE CUTOFF ON A SWE ELIGIBILITY LIST
ARE GUARANTEED ADVANCEMENT IF THEY REMAIN ELIGIBLE. HOWEVER, THESE
PERSONNEL ARE CONSIDERED NOT ELIGIBLE FOR FURTHER SWE COMPETITION
UNTIL THEY ADVANCE OFF THIS SWE ELIGIBILITY LIST. THOSE PERSONNEL
PLACING BELOW THE CUTOFFS, PROVIDING THEY REMAIN ELIGIBLE TO
COMPETE, WILL BE MAILED A SWE FOR THE SAME PAY GRADE FOR SUBSEQUENT
COMPETITION AND ARE HIGHLY ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE. IN KEEPING
WITH THE INTENT OF THIS POLICY, PERSONNEL WHO APPEAR ON TWO SWE
ADVANCEMENT LISTS AND ARE EITHER OFFERED ADVANCEMENT OR IDENTIFIED
FOR ADVANCEMENT FROM THE EARLIER SWE ELIGIBILITY LIST AS A RESULT
OF A REVISION TO THE CUTOFFS, ARE REMOVED FROM THE LATER SWE
ELIGIBILITY LIST IN WHICH THEY COMPETED.
7. AS NEW INFORMATION BECOMES AVAILABLE, E.G., NEW POSITIONS,
UNEXPECTED RETIREMENTS OR SEPARATIONS, OR OTHER PROGRAM CHANGES
IMPACTING THE ENLISTED WORKFORCE, THE NEED TO MODIFY THESE CUT NBRS
WILL BE EXAMINED. WHEN/IF THIS OCCURS, REVISED CUTOFFS WILL BE
PUBLISHED VIA ALCGENL.
8. INTERNET RELEASE AUTHORIZED.

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

I don't think that there was a mistake made to the cuts. If you will notice they are advancing 1 OSCM next year, which they have already selected the 3 ISCM next year. However they have not selected all of the ISCS and down. So I believe EPM1 is waiting to figure out how many people we will be losing in the OS rate before they come out with the cuts.

I would have to agree. They basicly state from OSC and down they aren't going to advance anyone when they are already advancing OS2 of the SWE. I think they have 0's due to the fact they just don't know and can't make a good guess until the IS rate is stood up... Master Chief.... Any thoughts?

Hey...Congrats to all the OSC's and OSCS's that made it

Don't you think they would put a paragraph in to that effect or release a seperate message.

Anyone else notice this is a chilling reminder of 1994/95? Might be the end of wide open advancements, at least for a while.

As per Master Chief Force notes


2008 Advancements
I have had a lot of questions concerning perspective advancements in 2008. Contrary to the popular myth, MCPOs are not sages, fortunetellers or soothsayers. (Not 100% of the times anyways). Obviously, 2008 will be an interesting time for advancements. We have caught up on some rapid growth spurts during previous years. We now have SWEs for every pay grade. We no longer offer SRBs. Those things alone would make it an interesting advancement season. Throw on top of all of that the loss of about 10% of our billets to IS, things will get really interesting. In actuality, if we loose exactly 5 OSCSs, 24 OSCs, 62 OS1s, 86 OS2s and 11 OS3s at the IS selection panel, it wouldn’t affect us at all. Problem is – that isn’t going to happen. If we loose less OSs at a certain pay grade, it would cause a slow down in advancement. We know that will happen at OS2 and OS1. The selection panel can only select 70 people to be IS2s. That will leave at least 16 extra OS2s. They can only pick 62 people to be IS1s and there are very well deserving applicants from other ratings at the E-6 level, so I expect us to be over billeted at the E-6 level too. It is too early to tell what might happen at the OSCS, OSC and OS3 level. All three of those have more people in those pay grades on the IS side than we are loosing billets from the OS side.

All i can think is, they HAD to release the message soon, so they just put 0 as a place holder until the dust settles with the IS thing. If you look, OS was not the only "locked out rate". The YN's also had "0" for many of the ranks (and i happen to know a lot of YN's who applied for IS).

All this means are no OS's are assured advancment at this time, it does not mean they will not advance any at all.

On a side note, i guess when the IS board gets together, they no longer have to deal with "if so and so is above the cut, he has to compete in the next higher pay grade" thing.

Either way, i guess i should start studying for the Nov 07 SWE as a precaution.

This does not surpise me at all, as soon as I heard that that cuts were out I didn't think much of it for the simple fact that they are still going over all the applications for IS and from past experience I knew that there was no way they could have a good idea as to how many chief's and first they were going to make.

I think Travis is the only one that has no worries at this point you know they will at least make one......LOL

quote:

I think Travis is the only one that has no worries at this point you know they will at least make one......LOL

LOL, not according to the msg!!

As per this message and previous IS messages, don't you have to make the initial OSC Cut to be considered as an ISC for that rate on 08?

I would think that they put that in consideration and use the revision on Nov. But for some reason, I feel that something shifty has been going on, or else they wouldn't of done the deadline prior to the cuts, and so on.
Just my 2 cents.

quote:

Originally posted by Hectorcaliente:
But for some reason, I feel that something shifty has been going on, or else they wouldn't of done the deadline prior to the cuts, and so on.
Just my 2 cents.

I agree 100%! It makes perfect sense.. this will pretty much lock everyone in who applied for IS at thier current paygrades so they do not have to deal with people being "above the cut" and applying for IS as the next highest paygrade.

I guess I picked a good screen name. Has anyone noticed that MC hasn’t been in to comment on this yet? He hasn’t been on the board since Friday, interesting.

MC is a member of the Lateral Panel, I hope he's too busy arguing why I should be an IS and not have the time to reply right now
OR maybe he's sitting in an office with ISMC and laughing

I thought it was bad being 133 on the list and having no hope but sitting at 3 on the list and having no hope just sucks

lol....all those who took the 07 SWE and submitted an IS package got Hustled by the Ultimate Hustle...lol

Talked to OS West, they will go deeper than 0, it is due to IS selection, so stand by to stand by.

quote:

Originally posted by osanddamnproud:
Talked to OS West, they will go deeper than 0, it is due to IS selection, so stand by to stand by.

No offense, but Wasn't that kind of obvious? LOL

quote:

Originally posted by bgcntry4:

quote:

Originally posted by osanddamnproud:
Talked to OS West, they will go deeper than 0, it is due to IS selection, so stand by to stand by.

No offense, but Wasn't that kind of obvious? LOL

Wow, may have been but all posts were rumor and speculation, thought I would help my shipmates out and provide the confirmation I received from OS West.

I'm not trying to step on your toes, I just thought that most of us understood what the 0's meant on that SWE cut list. As for the rumors and questions....I think they are more like how deep the cut will actualy go in the long run, or is that guy that is placed at 133 on the OSC list going to make chief just because he laterals over to IS....and so on and so on.


But you are right, and I thank you for going out of your way to check on it and stifle any rumors or questions about it.

Your welcome, I wanted to pass some info. Oh, and OS West is a panel member as well. Sure do hope they make at least 11 though.