I was wondering if anyone knew of any pubs or instructions out that talked about out of rate qualifications. Specifically if a CO or OIC can make it mandatory for someone to attain an out of rate qual. For example let’s say hypothetically an OIC is making every BM3 and BM2 coxswain or heavy weather coxswain at his unit certify boat engineer. I can't seem to find anything written on this and was just wondering if there is any guidance on something like this out their?

I can pretty much sum it up like this....it is the OIC's unit and he can require you to certify at anything he deems necessary. Your example of BM3's and BM2's certifying as engineers in addition to coxswain is a bad example. A coxswain who is also an engineer only knows his boat even better, thus making him or her a superior coxswain!

...your friendly OIC sends...

If it's a reference you're looking for, Ch.4 of CG Regs gives the CO/OIC their authority (and absolute responsibility) over those in their command. That would include dictating who is required to qualify as Coxswain, BO, Engineer, etc. If it's a change for the unit, it should be updated in the unit's training doctrine or Orgman, making it a standing order. You won't find anything in writing about "out of rate" qualifications, since I don't think there's any such thing in the CG.

quote:

A coxswain who is also an engineer only knows his boat even better, thus making him or her a superior coxswain!

Couldn't agree more!

I had a shortage of certified Engineers at my unit and required the SN to become Engineer Certified including assigning a certification deadline.

Lets throw out another hypothetical...

Lets say said BM3 or BM2 did not become engineer qualified within the allowed time frame...Can they be placed on performance probation?

Hypothetically.....

If the requirements were set forth for that BM3 or BM2 to certify within the unit Organization Manual and Standing Orders, then Article 12.B.16 of the Personnel Manual could apply for Inaptitude, thus placing the member on Performance Probation.

Let's see how far you would push that.

You got a BM2 at the MAA Division of a Sector with an attached Airstation. The Sector Commander requires them to certify as an Aircraft Commander and they fail. Can he be discharged under your reference? I know - I intentionally used an absurd one. I would bet though that neither would get past EPM-1.

Now, if you are talking about Performance Probation for potential reduction, then the Ref is 5.C.38.c of the PERSMAN and it is VERY specific that it must be "....The reason for the reduction must be solely incompetence as evidenced by the fact that the person is not qualified to perform the duties of his or her rate." Of course we all know that RATE is BM2, BM3, etc. So it all goes back to the EPQs and possibly the Competencies assigned by HQ to the billet.

So, something like Boat Engineer I think most folks would say is not RATING specific since you very often see non-rated folks accomplish the task.

We can get as hypothetical and absurd as you can get but the reality is BOAT Manual VOL I was re-written last year. It use to state "you would not reccomend a BM for advancement to E5 or above if they were not coxswain qualifed, if they were E5 or above and couldn't make coxswain they would be reduced", now it states if the member at boat force units who can't qualify in their boat crew duties in a timely manner they will be processed in accordance with chpt 12.B.16 for inapt. Time for reasonable amount should be the time it takes to qualifya new coxswain. Now the CO/OIC makes what he thinks each rate is required to quallify in for boat crew duties at their unit and it's in their org/sorm so they can hold them accountable.

I have heard of a FN who was Boat Engineer, crewman, and had passed his BTM Board but couldn't shoot, he was there for three eyars and was allowed to slide by. New CO came in and recommended for discharge specifically for not being BTM qualifed because he couldn't shoot, it went through.

Mighty I see what your are saying, but the BOAT Manual is specific to the Boat Forces Units. That scenarion wouldn't fall under the same category. Another station example, like if I had an EM1 at the station, his billet says fascilities, but he also has a tactical crewmember competency assigned to him in DA. To be tactical, you have to hold certain weapons quals. if he can't shoot, he can't be tactical crew. In reality an EM1 who was looking for cake duty coming to a station after coming off a cutter can literally be discharged because he can't qualify on a weapon and meet his required duties as a tactical B/C member and yes this has been ran all the way to EPM-1 and they concur it CAN happen by the way the manual is written, that is why it was re-wrote to encompass all positions not just Coxswains. Take a BM3, EPQ's do not require to be Coxswain, but their DA competency requires them in DA, and they can be held accountable and discharged if they do not meet the requirement, even if it isn't in the EPQ until they are an E5.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tybee2008,

Tybee, roger on the issues of the BOAT Manual. I would suggest that the Chief, Office of Boat Forces has no authority in regards to personnel actions such as discharges. They also should have no authority in regards as to what a BM is or is not required to do to be a BM. That is what we pay the RFMC for.

But yes, understand and agree it has happened. That doesn't make it right though.

Tybee / Mighty,

I think there is a definite difference in the hypotheticals that were thrown out there. In reality, the BOAT Man and PersMan are very specific when it comes to Boat Force Units. Lastly, that is why I put "could" in italics in my post above...to say that it can happen...not WILL happen. EPM has the final authority to say yes or no. I was merely answering the initial question asked of, "Can this happen?" with a "Yes, it can happen".

I for one have have been qualified boat engineer on the 25' TPSB...I took the classes that came on CD ROM passed the tests, completed the PQS and passed my board and check ride...On the other hand if I had to do the drawings on a 47 or 55 and be very proficient with all the systems I would have a serious issue...Outboards are not that difficult compared to the 47 or 55 plant...It makes no sense to me to make someone qualify at a job that requires so much technical expertise that is outside of their rating...

LE Competencies are not as technical as engineering competencies therefore dont compare IMHO...

As far as DA is concerned not all competencies listed are correct...Take mine for example...BM1 on the HEALY...The only competency listed is ADV Shiboard FF...Per the HEALY ORGMAN I am required to be Coxswain, LSO, U/W OOD and Inport OOD...Non of those are reflected in DA...

Even some of the job titles are incorrect...Alot of the XPO jobs are listed as Duty or Deck Watch Officer...Even the detailer says that DA is not an accurate tool for jobs and competencies...

Some folks just don't have the aptitude to perform a job outside their rate. That's why we have minimum scores for particular jobs. I think most of us BM's would be up crap creek if we were asked to go rewire a C130, and I think most of us would be pretty upset if we were booted to the curb because we didn't have the technical knowledge to do it.

On the flip side, telling Coxswains they need to obtain an Eng cert is well within reason. All coxswains should have a good working knowledge of what the engineer does and how the boat systems work. If the coxswain already knows their boat (like they should) an engineer cert wouldn't take much effort.

Just my 2cents!

quote:

On the flip side, telling Coxswains they need to obtain an Eng cert is well within reason. All coxswains should have a good working knowledge of what the engineer does and how the boat systems work. If the coxswain already knows their boat (like they should) an engineer cert wouldn't take much effort.

Well said! The way I see it is qualifications should start at the bottom and work to the top. Everyone, regardless of rate or their postition on the boat crew, should have the same qual path starting with BCM, moving up to engineer, and then finally coxswain. IMO you cant operate a piece of equipment to its fullest potential with out understanding how and why it works the way it does.

As far as drawings go, if a SN right out of boot can figure out how to draw the firemain system on a 378' than a BM of any paygrade should be able to draw the systems on a 47'.

All engineers are crewmembers, which means they can plot, drive, operate all the equipment and electronics, yada, yada, yada. Most boat engineers I know are pretty proficient boat handlers and if they took the time to pass the navrul/DWO test would be coxswains. No one's asking a BM to change out the engine, just to know the systems, parameters and Becces as well as your engineer. Hardly unreasonable, since ASVAB or no ASVAB, everyone knows we're smarter than they are!
Junior, as far as a 47' or 55' plant being too complicated... On my 87' everyone from the SA/FA to the BM2/MK2 are cross-qualified U/W EOW and QMOW/CMOW. If they can learn each others job, I think a BM can learn the 47' plant.

The 47' is not that bad, I was a FN/Qualified engineer for 2 years before making cox'n and a BM.
Nothing against anyone else, but I had a leg up on the other newly qualed cox'ns. Knowing the systems, and working very close with some good cox'ns for a couple years saved my ass more than once. That, and some great engineers and crewman.

If I were the OIC (I'm not, and won't be as an Airdale ), I would strongly encourage the guys who want to be a cox'n to go ahead and get the Engineer PQS done. Have them act as an u/w engineer every now and then.

quote:

As far as DA is concerned not all competencies listed are correct...Take mine for example...BM1 on the HEALY...The only competency listed is ADV Shiboard FF...Per the HEALY ORGMAN I am required to be Coxswain, LSO, U/W OOD and Inport OOD...Non of those are reflected in DA...

Send a note to your RFMC if you believe the comps are not accurate. He has ~6000 billets to look at, might have missed some. That said, the unit orgman doesn't rule the Required Comps in DA. Those are built between the RFMC and program.

quote:

Originally posted by CHunter_81:
The 47' is not that bad, I was a FN/Qualified engineer for 2 years before making cox'n and a BM.
Nothing against anyone else, but I had a leg up on the other newly qualed cox'ns. Knowing the systems, and working very close with some good cox'ns for a couple years saved my ass more than once. That, and some great engineers and crewman.

If I were the OIC (I'm not, and won't be as an Airdale ), I would strongly encourage the guys who want to be a cox'n to go ahead and get the Engineer PQS done. Have them act as an u/w engineer every now and then.

I concur, roger that.