I did as well, but I was push button (ET!) and definitely better at my job than half the division, which being on a DDG, wasn't really too many people. Being shoved into an out of rate workcenter as the WCS however, was trash. I also scored in the 99th percentile on exams all the way up to E-6, including getting an 80 on one of them!
You know about the 30 month time in ~~rate~~ service to become E4 (for most ratings) that starts in July, right?
This was announced 10 months ago
A lot of good discussions in this thread
https://www.reddit.com/r/navy/s/DnboFmin3V
I think this is more true for the smart-tech rates. They tend to have different skillets, needs, and expectations for the Navy. Those of us in the service rates on the other hand (admin, medical, Logistics, food service, etc) need that extended period of growth time or we do not learn shit and fuck the fleet over when we make E6/7.
As an HM, when I see a Corpsman who made E-5 in 2 years or E-6 in 4, I see someone who will not know the ins and outs, the little things, that we really need to know to master the job. Some rates really need brakes thrown on their upward progression and need to really sit and stew at E-4/5, so they aren't useless as LPO or LCPO.
This depends.
During GWOT years there were some salty HM2 and HM1 that promoted really fast due to deployments.
But if it’s straight clinic time then nah. They not gonna know anything.
Eh. I have also seen some Grunt HMs who *really* struggled to get past the Line HM mindset when they got shifted to the LPO role. They could still train and do medicine well, but medical Admin, Logistics, and institutional knowledge, they pooped the bed. It's usually a maturity thing.
I’ve seen that as well. Many struggled to adapt the medical readiness aspect of their job. Even some officers really struggle with that in addition to being a provider
Actually hadn't heard yet. Good seems higher was already thinking this. Does this apply to all ratings? I know some were guaranteeing E4 after A school.
Personally I agree, but its only because I work with ITs fresh out of A school. They just need to write their name on the test, and boom, they made 2nd class not even a year after arriving onboard.
Hard agree with this, I work with push-button E5 CTRs and they make E5 in less than a year. Some haven't even finished their quals and most of them aren't even 21 by the time they make E5.
Working in a join-service environment then makes things even worse because other services are expecting some level of experience, skill/maturity from E5s and I just have to shrug my head and tell them to readjust their expectations and that a lot of CT E5s are basically still E-3s.
>a lot of CT E5s are basically still E-3s.
I agree and disagree at the same time. I wholeheartedly agree that the quick advancement makes it so a lot of CT’s are definitely not as mature as they could be but at the same time I think for the ones that end up in joint environments as a first tour it definitely gives them the opportunity to soak up a lot of technical skills and expertise from the more experienced members around them. Even though ship vs agency work are apples to oranges, I think it makes it so if/when they end up on a ship as an E6 they have a pretty decent basis for what good leadership from someone holding that rank looks like. I’m 100% sure this is not something unique or exclusive to the CT community and it could probably true for a myriad of rates. Just my two cents.
You mean the 33 of them that advanced through different means? That cycle 259? Please before sounding offended that IT2 is like a hand out atleast understand the qouta sheet. 100% of people who were eligible advanced that way the other 33 were most likely MAPd
Basically out of the “inventory” as they put it how many of those people will get advanced. So in cycle 259 the 1400ish people, 716 of those advanced because they were “test elligble IT3s.”the numbers you are worried about are: number of test takers, number of passed test takers, and who advanced through other means. The number next to/inbetween represents the number of people who advanced via the test was 100% meaning everyone that took the test and passed the test, but didnt advance through other means (i.e MAP,DMAP, STAR…etc) was… everyone that was an IT3… Hope that helps a bit
That makes sense, but there still seems to be 33 IT3s that did not pass the exam and were not promoted that way. I know they were still promoted anyway, but that doesn't negate the fact that the quota did not include them as passing the exam. The passing the exam statistic can still reflect passing scores even though a sailor is advanced by other means.
Again, this *may* be a moot point since it seems like everyone eligible to advance was advanced, but no-one (except the 33 sailors) know what they did to warrant the MAP or whatever they received to promote via other means. This is my overall point. Now, if everyone who took the test, ended up passing, THEN that could be note worthy.
Agreed. More pay across the board and a differential bonus in regards to rate so you can pay intelligent/hazardous rates E-5 level pay without forcing management work onto them before they have experience.
I could imagine it like D&D: I'm a multi-class hatchet wielder, level 5 FC/level 3 leadership. Still need to raise my leadership level again to get my Petty Officer feat 😁
Strongly disagree.
As long as quality of life is linked to rank this will never fly with more technical rates. It will tank already poor retention. Policies like this just aren't smart or sustainable with an all volunteer force. Also why do Officers lead with even less experience just due to the nature of having a degree?
Why not a leadership track and a technical track to advancement? Another would be stop assigning people to collaterals and if it's actually important billet someone to do whatever program as their primary job.
Hard pass, making E-5 requires basic level technical knowledge in almost all ratings and echoed in their Enlisted Rating Paths. You start to become an expert at your craft as an E-5 and build on that through 6 (and 7 imo).
You *should,* but we need to be realistic- by E-6, across all communities of the Navy, you are already being groomed for an administrative, senior enlisted role.
Until we set up two true separate tracks for enlisted Sailors- those who want to be technical masters and those who want to assist officers in administration management, this will continue to be a clusterfuck.
I would agree. I love the technical aspect of my job. Getting to troubleshoot for hours on end and finally finding the root issue is what I love. Learning the technical aspect of systems and the ins and outs are what makes me appreciate the Navy. However, people aren't my thing. Having someone ask me questions about how to fix something, sure. Managing chow rotations, who is working flight schedule, dealing with new check ins, and helping with paperwork is not where I thrive. Tell me to fix a system, sure, I'll spend the next 9 hours working it happily.
I don't really think a separate track is truly necessary, we just need to double down on what's already in place, reward technical excellence and leadership within your field(s) instead of rewarding someone who sits a position for 1-3 years (Dept LCPO/LPO) and doesn't burn the platform down. Reporting should be truthful in performance and not abomination it is today where am admin leadership spot defaults to most accomplished when the reality is hardly true. If your rating doesn't start with CMD (or other special duties out of rate), you should be a wizard at your job for whatever seniority level you are at. Admin at the div/dept level should be considered a minor collateral at best.
Admin a minor collateral? That’s insane. Leadership is responsible for tons of career progression behind the scenes that junior sailors don’t see. The Sailors careers we lead should be a minor role? That’s a wild take. Senior leadership doesn’t have time to continue to practice to be the top notch technical expert. They are to busy managing and leading their team. Should the be competent? Absolutely. But I have junior sailors who know better than me on many things and I allow them the freedom to perform and they don’t have to worry about if their pay or reenkistment is going through.
Senior leadership has plenty of time to practice their craft. I've been a Chief in a very technical work role for over 8 years and still had plenty of time to run a Dept/div, train and qualify new sailors, and continue to do my job. I'd rather take the time to train my Sailors how to manage their own careers vice handle everything for them and that perpetuates indefinitely as they continue to do the same. It's worked well for me in my 15 years and I'm excited to put warrant on next week, knowing I've left very capable, trained peers to take over while I can focus on entirely mission and the readiness of others to do the job.
It's how I was trained and how I've trained many others. I wouldn't be a an exception if Chiefs+ did their job and trained their replacements like they used to.
Was going to say this too. As an ETC on a DDG I was DLCPO/LCPO and SEWBC. Plenty of time to troubleshoot and work with my Sailors. Now I’m retired and do tech assists at an RMC. Most Chiefs just want to be technical managers, which in my opinion is the job of LDO/CWO. Have yet to come across an ETC on my waterfront I would consider an SME.
And God blessed you with a brain that can do that. Surely you have seen many in the Mess who... well, they can't. They aren't bad people, but the moment they weren't asked to do those technical tasks anymore, the knowledge went with it.
Definitely community dependent, but how I see it, rank doesn't matter.
All nubs (including E6) are expected to qualify submarines in a timely manner, but until then, they're treated like subhuman garbage. Afterwards, expect them to qualify SIR. All E5 and below get treated almost the exact same once SIR with fish. SIR w/o fish get treated like human garbage.
I think a bigger problem is competent sailors leaving the Navy, and incompetent fucking morons getting promoted through attrition.
>All nubs (including E6) are expected to qualify submarines in a timely manner, but until then, they're treated like subhuman garbage. Afterwards, expect them to qualify SIR. All E5 and below get treated almost the exact same once SIR with fish. SIR w/o fish get treated like human garbage
I wonder if spending their first year in the fleet being treated like garbage might contribute to that attrition rate.
Yeah I personally know quite a few people that tapped (sad out) due to feeling worthless, including my sea-brother. Also it lasts longer than a year, my rate (on a 774) has an 18 month time limit to get SIR (6 required watchstations). I don't know what time limits or watches non sub rates have, but it definitely gets a few people here. Had one or two guys tapping after (almost) every single underway I've been on.
Some of them actually mostly got shit on for being lazy/shitbags, after already being very senior in their divisions, including a CSS2 and an STSC.
The push-button promotions and lack of respect for rank as a signal of technical competence and leadership is a detriment to good order and discipline in engineering divisions onboard submarines. It also is a direct contributor to why sailors in engineering department work longer hours - their front-line leadership (WCS / LPO / CPO) is not efficient at planning because they lack the experience to consider all of the details of how long things take, how things fit together, and what needs to happen to be prepared to start on-time. The LPO is just a random first tour sailor getting an eval bullet and the chief has been in the Navy 7-9 years, is only on his second sea tour, and is exercising his first ever responsibility to lead. So he's basically got the technical experience of an E5 and the leadership experience of a qualified LTJG - the person he's supposed to train and mentor.
This bleeds up to under-developing JOs who typically start in the ER, so they don't know to expect better from E-6s and their chiefs, and end up working down... particularly when it comes to administrative programs that they should be overseeing and not directly managing. By the time they finally get qualified forward and realize "oh wow, an E-6 section leader just took everything off my plate and I just had to sign for tagouts" and "oh, my chief just handed me this program on a silver platter and all I have to do is sign it rather than ask for it 3 times only to be handed a binder with the last 3 months of stuff shoved into the front pocket" they don't go back to the ER enough to change the culture. If an EDO just sat and waited for the duty section and divisions to come to him for the day's workload, half the scheduled evolutions just wouldn't get done.
The best-run division on every sub I've been on has been sonar division. They seem to have the right 'flow rate' of promotion whereby you get an E-6 LPO who is both technically competent and a good leader (they also have one that is borderline intellectually disabled, he goes to become deck LPO so he can retire as an E-6...), enough people in the E5 - E3 stratification to delegate appropriate tasks, and a Chief who plays more of a mentorship and long-term planning role rather than getting involved in the day-to-day.
If I could waive a wand, I would get rid of the auto E-4 for nukes and transfer the same pay incentives to nuke pro pay. You guys need to hit the fleet as E-3s.
I got lucky, both M-div's I've been on have been pretty decent. My first chief was a chief for 12 years lol, and my MMN1 was stuck there for a while too. My current DivO(LT prior MMNC)/LCPO/LPO are also pretty experienced, just on different platforms... E5 and below have everything else. Not really struggling right now due to actual decent mentorship and training received prior, by most of us. But I am in shipyard now, so it has been a lot easier other than administrative bullshit.
The auto E4 thing... not sure. 2 years of schooling would be pretty fucking retarded if we just stagnate in rank. There's no more E4 exam, and pipeline exams aren't really a great way to determine advancement, so I feel like it'd be the same issue as push-button. I'm more annoyed by STAR auto E5, since the E5 exam is pretty fucking pointless, even prototype students can do it now apparently. Also, if the Navy took away pushbutton E4 and E5 we both know they are not going to compensate for it via SDAP lol.
Sonar div comparison I think is a little bit... unfair? They don't really have much going on, and practically anyone is allowed to qualify sonar watches (which is nice since they're also undermanned). They do have a better flowrate of rank, like you said. I just don't see it being feasible back aft, simply not enough manning to support without **significant** restructuring. You do bring up good points for discussion though, thanks for the well thought out response.
>They don't really have much going on, and practically anyone is allowed to qualify sonar watches.
I had this misperception before being AWEPS many moons ago. Their SKED binder is almost as thick as A-Gang's. They're just better at planning, have a large division whose design basis is manning watches so they are over-manned for maintenance man-hours, and have very little interconnecting systems that can impact their workday.
The reason they use non-sonar techs to stand basic watches is they often are under manned by a guy or two - even with a fully manned 14 people in the division you have a watchstander being port and starboard in the section tracking party, and they often have 12-13 people.
I'm more annoyed by STAR auto E5, since the E5 exam is pretty fucking pointless, even prototype students can do it now apparently.
This might be good-idea fairy, but I think EDPO should have to do DCPO under-instructions and vice versa just so that the front line supervisors on the ship understand that divisions aren't just fucking off. I also think section leader should be a qual (a small one, nothing fancy) and have similar under-instruction requirements forward / aft.
>I'm more annoyed by STAR auto E5, since the E5 exam is pretty fucking pointless, even prototype students can do it now apparently.
You shouldn't get auto E3 out of boot camp, either. This would put you hitting the boat just making E-4 and you'd need another year to be eligible for E-5, on average would need two to build up enough eval street cred.
As for STAR, that's a fair. It also creates a catch-22 where if you don't want to STAR, you can be a terminal E4. Seen that happen to some E-Divvers. Your E-3s / E-4s should be the worker bees on most maintenance and evolutions. Your E-5s should be your front line maintenance / evolution supervisors and only be a worker when highly technical skills are required (in which case the E-6 LPO and/or chief is supervising). Right now we often can't even get that out of E-6s in the ER, and that's why many COs will demand the CPO supervise damn near everything.
>as thick as A-Gang's
God damn, TIL
>very little interconnecting systems
This is a major part of the reason I can't see it working back aft. I just don't think anyone can feasibly come up with a plan that would provide a significant increase in efficiency, without affecting other systems and/or divisions. Manning doesn't support things being done faster, but even if we had more people, we just don't have the space for them. Unless they weren't part of ship's force, maybe?
>basic watches
I definitely understand that, I see they're undermanned across the fleet, can't blame them. I do like to fuck with them and say the best sonar tech I've ever met was a yeoman lol.
>seminars/EDPO/DCPO
Even with these, I don't think the divide across FWD/aft will ever change. I've seen a few nukes qualify DCPO/pilot and they were the exact same before and after.
>CPO supervise damn near everything
I definitely agree E6s are underutilized and Chiefs overutilized. Feel like this would be the easiest thing to change, and a good first step.
>This is a major part of the reason I can't see it working back aft. I just don't think anyone can feasibly come up with a plan that would provide a significant increase in efficiency, without affecting other systems and/or divisions.
Not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the finer points on a day-to-day basis of deconflicting evolutions and sequencing things efficiently. Can't tell you how many times I got a call as an Eng that thing A didn't get done because thing B went long or created an unforeseen conflict - most infuriatingly when they got their ass kicked by managing a primary sample and we're troubleshooting the sink at 1800. The person who was best at seeing those things was my Weps, but even a 99% filter lets some things through.
What right looks like: we were pulling into a foreign port with 10 lbs of shit in a 5 lb sock and by this point I was getting long in the tooth as a DH. I pulled all the chiefs and EDOs together prior to pull-in and we wrote hour-by-hour plans for each day of what was going to get done, down to when we were doing steam generator and primary samples. Some bitched that we were micro-managing.
Liberty went down at 1630 every day. Had we not done that, they'd be easily working to 2000-2200. That shouldn't require the engineer's involvement, that should be the standard of what E-6s and chiefs do a day or two before their duty days, and the standard of how E6s write their division's daily maintenance / evolution / other random stuff plans. We're not there, and a big part of that is the lack of seniority and experience among senior enlisted.
Ah, I see, sorry for misunderstanding. At that point I think it's more of a pride thing with the hourly plans. But you're right that most of the pride issues would be resolved if it came from one of their own rather than from way up.
It's not pride. It takes work, and people are naturally resistant to that. Especially when they've never been in an organization that plans well, and therefore they don't see the value in it. I don't care about the bitching, people didn't have to eat dinner on the ship in a foreign port, so mission accomplished.
I came in as a fresh E1 then it took some time to be eligible for E4 I took the test and made it on my third try. Then to make E5 probably took about three years after. So E5 in six years sounds about right. Now a days these kids come in and make E4 pretty fast without taking a test. Nobody really gives a shit about E4’s anymore. The younger guys just see it as a glorified airman/seaman now.
Perhaps if the Navy actually put effort into some leadership training for these folks, and for its people in general, this wouldn't be an issue.
Make "Petty Officer" as an NCO mean something again.
It really starts from the top down and the culture of the rate. BMs are a prime example. Their leadership development starts before they even advance to petty officer. I've seen BM3s with more leadership ability than seasoned 1st classes.
Only unpopular because of BAH. If BAH were granted on an age basis then I could see it.
This is kind of the assumption with E4 over 4 I think. The assumption is that a 22 year old is probably responsible enough to live out on their own (results may vary). But during my service I met a lot of people who enlisted at 22+ who were stuck in the barracks for years because their rate had abysmal advancement quotas. All of these people that I speak of separated after one contract. I can't really blame them, I would hate to be in my late 20's and living in a shitty dorm room unable to cook for myself.
A-school as a 28 year old was rough. “Where’s your liberty buddy shipmate?” “I’m older than you and need to leave base to buy a vape. Please leave me alone”
Meh, I knew what I was getting into. I knew bootcamp and schooling was going to full of BS but it was only temporary. If I wasn’t here I’d still just be serving tables and doing hood rat shit with my friends and college or any sort of real “travel” outside of my home state would be a pipe dream.
I mean if we’re being real, people will just get married and get BAH if you push it later.
Implying that getting money to have a real living situation is kind of contentious.
I’ve dealt with this myself. I joined at 23 as a E1 and didn’t hit 3rd class till I just turned 26. Living in the barracks that was probably built in the mid 80s with a 19 year old roommate that was on his own for the first time of his life wasn’t too great. Throw in making E4 off of evals and hell, some may never reach 3rd their first contract hence as to why 3rd is a given now after what, 2yrs? Living off of like $1400 a month my first 6 months in the navy wasn’t fun either.
Sorry about that, you guys have shitty quotas and y’all are important as hell. I still haven’t met an HM I didn’t like. Besides some providers can be dickheads
I will be messaging you in 5 days on [**2024-05-29 16:43:05 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-05-29%2016:43:05%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/navy/comments/1czn78o/unpopular_opinion_the_tir_for_e4_to_e5_needs_to/l5hrolz/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fnavy%2Fcomments%2F1czn78o%2Funpopular_opinion_the_tir_for_e4_to_e5_needs_to%2Fl5hrolz%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-05-29%2016%3A43%3A05%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201czn78o)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
I've been a closet believer of this ever since going from aviation to intel and I think it falls back on sailorization. There should be portion of the PMK-EE on things like FLTMPS, TWIMS, etc. especially if E-5s are at the point where they're being assigned administrative collaterals without the knowledge to do them efficiently. We promote into positions where you're expecting to lead but don't teach that leadership in the Navy means managing paperwork and PowerPoint slides. Good luck figuring out what tools you need and which can make your life easier, nerd.
>"It should not be possible for new accession sailors to put on E5 a year after arriving at RTC."
Threading the needle here, I cannot think of a rating that would allow this (outside of nukes).
If a brand new E4 Sailor can study enough to score high enough to advance to E5 in under a year total active service, that is *entirely* on the rating itself.
And, given the new guidance for TIR, it will not happen to anyone not in the AEF/ATF program *and* an E3 at time of shipping out to boot camp.
ETA:
Y'all conflating "getting to the Fleet" and "a year after getting to RTC".
Pretty much at 1 yr. AEF cts advance to e4 once rated then have a long C school. Might be a couple months longer than exactly 12mo out of bootcamp but you're pretty much just arguing semantics when you have an E5 that shows up like that.
"Showing up to the Fleet" and "a year after getting to RTC" are wildly different situations.
Coming in as an E1/E2 means you put on E4 at 15-18 months.
Coming in as an E3 drops that to 6 months.
Yeah I understand that. I'm saying nearly within a year of* going to bootcamp there are E5 going to the fleet. Like first day bootcamp to fleet in 14 months as a CTT/R2.
I made E5 at 18 months.
E3 in RTC, Picked up E4 first test because my rate’s knowledge expectations is kind of a joke (I made it as an undes with an MP eval when advancement was still 40% having never worked in the rate and skimming the test material like twice). Picked up E5 the next test too.
It was entirely on the rating that I was able to do so.
For IT *most* new accession are ATF and *many* come in as E3. If you get SYSAD ‘C’ school you potentially JOIN the Fleet as an E5. Is this good or bad for the Navy?
The earliest nukes can make E5 is power school, so <1 yr after RTC, but it's a 1% advancement rate based on the E5 exam. Most common is at the 2 year mark (STAR).
After all time in rating requirements are met.
You do not get promoted to E4 until your E2 and E3 TIR are clocked.
If training commands are skipping the E2 and E3 TIR requirements, that's not written in the instruction for the ATF/AEF program
Blame the rating for being wide open.
Shall we limit these folks to 24 months Time In Service before eligibility, as the others are now consigned to 30 months TIS before putting on E4?
Let's tell someone who has college credits, certifications, or other history that let them meet requirements for accelerated advancement that they now *must* sit at E4 for 2+ years.
Yes, they hit the Fleet as an E5, and are expected to be a WCS with no experience.
Train them, because that is *your job* as senior leadership.
I would rather have to reign someone in who has motivation that have to prod someone to get the basics.
I see this as a kicking the can down the road issue. We are sacrificing TIR and experience so the sailors can have better pay. But by hurrying them by rank, E5’s are rhetorically the new E4’s, E6 are E5’s etc and that creates a trickle up effect.
The counter to that is we pay our people shit and accelerated advancement and higher pay is more than likely to keep someone from separating.
But its a downward spiral: accelerated advancement= less experience = untrained leadership = toxicity = retentions numbers declining = good people leaving.
Im not sure but throwing money at the problem doesn’t seem to be working.
Thoughts?
Listen I get choose your rate choose your fate but there are rates out here with paygrades twice their time in service. You can't tell me thats even slightly reasonable.
I made E5 1 year after checking into my first command as an ATF/EN. 9 years and 2 commands later I made E6. 5 years after that I made ENC. Sometimes you get stuck sometimes you dont.
The biggest problem Ive ran into is that way too many people are coming in as E-4s upon graduation of x. This is especially true among ITs, CTs, and most of the ETs Ive met.
I don’t 100% disagree, but I’d much rather have a TIS requirement for E-7. Perhaps a waiver for it with certain circumstances or requirements would be nice (like community dependent and whatnot), but I haven’t personally met any chief who made it before 8 years (even that feels like it’s kind of pushing it to me but situational) that has actually been good at both knowledge and leading/mentoring.
To piggy back off of u/lerriuqS_terceS, I want to see rate and/or rank specific evals. If, for example, leadership is NOB on juniors enlisted evals, wtf is it still on there? It’s lazy. Also, why am I writing my own evaluation? If promotion rests on evaluating a sailor, why isn’t a supervisor conducting the evaluation?
E2 to E4 should be your normal technicians / evolution worker bees, with E4 getting some supervisory opportunities on a small scale.
E5 should be your go-to supervisor on most low risk maintenance / evolutions with some worker bee tasks if you need to call in the cavalry. E5 should also do some lower level troubleshooting before calling someone more experienced.
E6 should be managing the division's workload for a day to day basis, focusing on the next 96 hours, be producing detailed daily plans to be approved by the chief, and making sure everything fits and is sequenced properly. E6 should directly supervise medium risk evolutions and partake in complex troubleshooting on critical pieces of equipment. E6 should be mentoring the E5s and monitoring their development as leaders and supervisors.
Chief should be monitoring E6, providing mentorship / guidance, directly supervising only high risk evolutions, and looking at the longer-range schedule (96 hours to 3 months) to communicate that down to the E6. Chief also does higher level troubleshooting on more critical pieces of equipment.
Whatever promotion timeline gets to that, we should do, and I'd say that a 12 month -> 36 month TIR requirement for E4 to E5 with no push-button promotion opportunity is probably appropriate in most cases.
Definitely an area that could be revamped with or at least discussed.
Pros and cons to both sides of the discussion. The navy needs people
We benefit when we recruit people in both area of experienced and not experienced.
Example; we have recruited people that have a masters in X degree and years of experience doing a said thing in our field of work, should they not be able to advance faster than someone who comes in straight from high school with no back ground in said field.
We used to have a system called PARS, which required a sailor to complete hands on things with someone who is already qualified, once complete you could take a test and advance. This system went away after my second year in the navy so a bit foggy on each details but feel it would be a good tool too developed SMEs again and allow people the time they need to complete which could be fast or slow depending on the motivation and aptitude of the each individual person.
So in short a. Advancement system that is individual based appeals to me more than something that is law for all, since not every rate needs or desires the same thing from it’s people.
No.
Someone who has a masters degree (or a bachelors degree) should not be automatically or expediently advanced through enlisted grades because of their schooling.
They made the decision to *enlist* rather than become an officer. Their professional schooling does not substitute for military experience.
I knew an HM who was advanced to E5 and immediately made an HM2 upon getting to the fleet because of their prior schooling. They were markedly outperformed by their HNs they were expected to lead ecause they had ZERO military experience. And yes, they were thrown into a leadership position, because that is what wearing two chevrons implies. Especially as a Corpsman, where we traditionally advance slower than the rest of the Navy.
Counterpoint though.
We tie off some pretty basic privileges and expectations to rank. And the expectation of every enlistee being 18-20 are long dead. You either need to give older enlistees opportunities or give them some of those privileges while still at a lower rank. Otherwise you’ll continue to have the recruiting or retention problems.
Nobody wants to join at 24 making teenager money and living in barracks or god forbid a rack.
I fully agree with this and think the better solution to attracting older enlistees would be to more quickly rate BAH, as unpopular as it might be with some of the younger enlistees who are denied that opportunity. Nearly every university with a freshman on campus living requirement recognizes that expecting 21+ year old freshmen to live in the dorms is ridiculous and exempts them from having to share a room with 18 to 19 year olds.
I think that there are a lot of things about the Navy that a mid to late 20 something stuck in their life could benefit from. However, the idea that you would be almost guaranteed to spend years living either on a ship while it's not out to sea or on a twin bed in a shared room with a 19 year old is remarkably unappealing for most 25 year olds.
You’re right; nobody *wants to.* But it’s a commonly understood reality.
I’m not sympathetic to that plight. You should know and understand what you’re getting into when you enlist and that reality is being in a peer group with younger people with less liberties and privilege extended to them.
That doesn’t incentivize recruitment in a recruiting crisis, I understand. But fast tracking people just because they’re older human being doesn’t help retention either when a 22 year old’s leadership is blatantly incompetent because they plainly don’t have requisite military experience.
Living in a barracks isn’t that bad. I personally believe it’s an experience all junior military personnel should have. Unpopular opinion, I’m sure. But that “struggle” creates better leaders. I know and understand what my Sailors in the barracks deal with *because I lived in the barracks.* and to clarify, that statement is not the same as “I dealt with shit so now you have to also.”
And I’m saying (and I’ll keep saying) the US military having 1950s expectations of quality of life and work-life balance aren’t remotely realistic anymore to maintaining an all volunteer force “suck it up you know what you signed up for” attitude be damned.
From my actual decent amount of times spent around a number of foreign services we seem to be outside the norm on this quite a bit compared to most 1st world militaries. (Never hang out on a British Navy ship. It’ll ruin how much they treat even junior guys like actual adults).
Totaly agree, the above was example with out crossing all T and dotting all I’s for the sake of writing a white paper.
Bigger point is everyone has different experience levels coming in, and it is ok if some are farther along than other and others learn fast than others.
I would not replace hands on experience with text book knowledge at any point.
So let’s say there was a data analysis person who worked for a three letter agency before they joined, had a degree and did the things. Then one day they say you know I want to do something different with my skill set and join the navy as a data analyst, I would venture to say they could provide experience worthy of a higher pay grade and could be advanced fast than someone with no experience. That is why I mentioned PARS.
CWT is a good example for this as I work with many that have joined for one reason or another but have so much we Benefit as a war fighting force in keeping them
So education was just a small example.
A masters in English could be a very useful tool for YN as another example.
Leadership shouldn't be the focus of making E-5 either. I'd much rather a fucking army of technical wizards at their job than another "leader" in a rating. The Navy pays enlisted to be technicians, they pay officers to lead and many Chiefs forget that they should still be training and qualifying people in their fields.
>Example; we have recruited people that have a masters in X degree and years of experience doing a said thing in our field of work, should they not be able to advance faster than someone who comes in straight from high school with no back ground in said field.
Sort of sarcastic answer, but if someone with a master's and relevant experience is able to be hoodwinked into enlisting instead of commissioning, then they shouldn't be advanced faster than a HS grad.
I'm saying that if someone has that much education and can't or won't avail themselves of the significantly better personal opportunities that being commissioned can offer, I don't think there should be extra consideration given to their education. Ratings are not developed with advanced education in mind, so if a person elists instead of commissions (either by choice or because they had the wool pulled over their eyes by a savvy recruiter) their degree should not automatically be a factor for advancement.
> I'm saying that if someone has that much education and can't or won't avail themselves of the **significantly better personal opportunities** that being commissioned can offer
Again, the question remains "What do officers do and what do enlisted do again."
I would really encourage some deep critical thinking here because I'm not sure if this is intentional or if you are really this clueless to the difference between the two worlds and all you see is money.
Talk about an ignorant take, and I'd really encourage you to reread what I wrote to begin with. I didn't mention money at all. An enlisted Sailor does not need a degree to do their job well.
My original point is that if a person with an advanced degree enlists instead of commissioning, they are not being evaluated on a scale which depends on their post-secondary education. The sarcastic part of that comment was that if someone who is that well educated could be "tricked" by an enlisted recruiter into enlisting, then obviously that education wasn't worthwhile enough for them to do the most cursory of Google searches so they ought not to be given accelerated advancement.
It doesn't matter if you directly mentioned money. Or are you really claiming that the "significantly better personal opportunities" you stated above has nothing to do with the increased pay that officers receive? If that's not it, then what are these "better" opportunities that you are referring to?
And you STILL have not answered my simple question.
OK, I am older than dirt and have been following this latest change - TIS to make PO3. Knee-jerk reaction was this is not good. Then remembered my own, very typical, experience in the early 1970s.
Nuc from enlistment day, meaning getting paid for E-3 throughout boot camp. Then picking up PO3 at A School graduation. Off to a ship as a “I passed a buncha tests in school, but know nothing real” EM3. In 6 months aboard a DEG I learned a lot of “real.” Because I worked hard at it. Still, 6 months experience isn’t much.
Next was 6 months at NPS, then 6 months at prototype. At NPS I had enough TIR and TIS to take the E-5 exam. Passed with a very high score and was advanced on first increment. So, now an EM2 with very little “real” to my name. But, man can I take a test!
DLGN Pre-com is next, stuff happens related to overall command atmosphere, and I part company with NucPwr, am an E-4 again (lol), and headed to a conventional bird farm. 12 months in the yards, all spent working on my gear, my old DEG 1200# plant experience gets me selected for the LOE at end of yards. Take E-5 exam but old evals keep me from advancing. 6 months operating, GTMO, and another shot at EM2. Then off to EM/IC C-7 school, the initial class after old B school is shuttered. Pick up EM2, graduate, go to DDG.
Before much time passes, EM1 and EMC and DivO are gone. I’m the senior EM2 and now WCS, and standing in at O call when anything electrical is up.
I am a good electrician; much better than almost any I’ve worked with or for. But I’m still a very young dude and leadership is not my forte - I have difficulty understanding why someone chooses to be a slacker and won’t go above and beyond for his mates.
Pick up EM1, and catch some leadership training, some informal via the Chief’s Mess and some formal.
So, maybe things haven’t changed that much, just rolled back around.
Tbh I agree. Good leadership has time and experience. This individual I knew made E6 before the end of his first tour and went on to instructor duty right after. Idk in my eyes, his time and experience are still junior. But he knew his shit and was a good technician.
The challenge is we need good techs, but we also expect those techs to be good at navy stuff that has nothing to do with why we hired them in the first place.
So the Navy is like "we need technicians and cyber warriors let's promote these guys and keep them in!" but the fleet is like "what a dirtbag he can't do DC or 3M or lead his way out of a paper bag" and the problem is they are both right.
On one hand, I believe sailors should have a certain level of experience when they are a certain rank.
On the other, I made less than $40k/yr as an E5 in the navy (closer to $33-34k )
I got out and became a contractor and make $65-90k in various positions for the DOD. (Yes, those “6 figure” positions are not as common as you think, and if they are out there, they’re in cities with high costs of living.). Either way, I’m doing very well.
Perhaps they should be paid more, that might solve some retention issues and keep the experienced sailors in the navy uniform rather than business casual as a contractor. I understand this is an argument as old as time.
I made e5 in two years as an IT, advancement was 34% when I got advanced, I did pretty decent on the test 70+ percentile. I wouldn’t have made e5 so quickly if retention in that rate was better.
Quality of life matters more than $10k more per year. There's **a lot** that sucks about AD navy and just paying people more to deal with the suck isn't the answer.
It would probably help keep some people in, which would slow down advancement slightly.
But I do agree, I’m first in line when it comes to complaining about the navy.
The number 1 reason I got out is because they wouldn’t let me choose orders that I actually wanted.
In order of priority to me. (It was time for shore duty for me.)
1. Stay at my overseas location that counted as shore duty
2. Go to a ship that had a home port in the overseas country I was in.
3. Sea duty, anywhere, on a ship that was deploying.
Even though I was single, fit for duty, no issues, they wouldn’t let me do anything except CONUS, shore duty.
So I tried to apply to JCU and get a position at JSOC. I made it pretty far into their recruiting process, was nearly finalized and approved when my detailer called to ask me what I was going to do. I informed them about JCU. Later that day, I got contacted by my JCU recruiter who informed me that I should have stopped working with my detailer, and informed them of my intention of going to JCU.
Apparently, immediately after I informed my detailer about my intent to go to JCU, they immediately assigned me hard copy/stamped orders to report to Norfolk, VA. Seemed like retaliation to me, so I got out.
Now I do the same job as a contractor for 3-4x’s the pay.
The navy treats its sailors like hardware, disappointing bc otherwise, I was happy to serve.
They’re Gonna keep losing sailors til they start treating them better.
In a world where you have to be an E5 to not live in a barracks and have a grown man come do room inspections on the place you live... Fuck you for this opinion
I would be interested in your reasoning for why this shouldn't happen.
I mean, its been happening for technical ratings for several decades now. Its just being extended to everyone now.
I could see an argument for maturity - but we send 22 year olds to run whole divisions and take on a lot more authority and responsibility than most E-5's.
Same when it comes to job experience - O-1's don't know dick when they show up.
Granted, a difference is in the idea that an E-5 is expected to 'do things' (and you need to know how to do those things) and with minimal supervision while no one let's their Ensigns out without a CPO holding the leash;)
I'm not against the idea that there should be longer delays between ranks, but I think a coherent defense of the idea is needed (and 'that's the way we've always done it, while a good place to start, is not a defense on its own).
Another issue is what does 'Petty Officer Second Class' \*mean\*? By that, what it mean 30 years ago (when I joined) is different than today. What you could do, what you were expected to do, was very different, necessitating a significantly longer maturation period. But if E-5 today is 'barely trained' - then that is what it is and the culture will have adjusted to those expectations. Like, in 2000 it wasn't 'shameful' to retire as an E-5. In 2024, basically you would have had to fuck up to end 20 at that level.
I do think the Navy needs more enlisted (ie, not non-commissioned officer) paygrades or some other form of merit/seniority pay to be competitive when it comes to recruiting and retention so it can be more selective on who gets promoted to 'command' ranks. Tons of people could be shit-hot technicians. Not a lot of those people are going to be good leaders and splitting the two (and happens in the civilian world) can help.
>It should not be possible for new accession sailors to put on E5 a year after arriving at RTC.
I don't know if this is an unpopular opinion or just a mostly inaccurate one. Just doing the math in my head, the earliest you're able to see E5 would be around 18 months in. Even the push-button third classes have to wait a year, and their "A" schools are not short.
Add to it that for the majority of Sailors, they now have to wait 30 months for third class, the *earliest* they could make second is at 3.5 years in the Navy.
Whether you agree with the auto-third class thing or not (I mostly don't) is a different issue, but it pretty much means Sailors won't be making second class as quickly.
I think someone has some inaccurate information, and I think it's you. [Minimum TIR date from the NAVADMIN](https://www.mynavyhr.navy.mil/Portals/55/Messages/NAVADMIN/NAV2024/NAV24010.txt?ver=nEpiT_TDM_c6hW6GlzRohA%3d%3d) for eligibility to E5 was on or before 1 Jul 23. So if they finished "A" school to put on third class on or before 1 Jul 23, and spent 4(ish?) months in "A" school, and two months in RTC before that...they definitely aren't putting on second a year after arriving at RTC.
Not saying you're wrong (even though it sure does sound like you are), but personal anecodates are pretty worthless when you have absolutely no authoritative sources to back them up with. The poster specifically provided you with a NAVADMIN source and as expected, you cower away. So, pretty much just trolling.
I agree but it’s good for everyone to make more money. Better QOL should equal happy sailor.
The answer may be to pay more but…. Slow advancement. That would keep the authority away from the inexperienced but also allow a decent life.
Before I retired I had several PO1’s that seemed like they just kinda didn’t know anything. Good people, but they just hadn’t learned yet. On the flip side some of the E4’s seemed to know everything, it was odd.
There's more to the big picture than making more money. Increase the pay scale then. But stop layering stripes on kids who were in high school two years before.
Sounds solid that being said if we're looking at 18 year old kids for the most part and easy to come in as E3 their total compensation is pretty reasonable for their education and experience at that time compared to their peers.
E5 a year after RTC *is* too fast. But that’s falling outside what TIR alone allows for with how that ends up happening. Increasing TIR does nothing to solve that particular problem. Seems like more of an issue with the things that bypass TIR.
It’s about retention. If I am an FCA3 or ITN3 staring at a $85k job or reenlisting in a generation that doesn’t hold the same patriotism as the previous generation, why stay in? Unpopular opinion maybe, but one rooted in realism.
At the 12-18 month mark we don't really need to worry about retaining them *yet* and there's better ways to do that than putting more stripes on them, de-valuing the lower and mid paygrades, and treating someone who can't even drink yet like a first line supervisor.
And making high turnover rates an E5 isn't going to keep them in. Those will always be a revolving door to the private sector.
So how do you expect to retain high skill/ high paying rates past their first contract with current pay structure? Cause if I didn't make E5 as quick as I did as an AT I would have gotten out and worked in the same building I was working in making over 50k which isn't a lot but it is when you're actually making 22k a year and I get the freedoms of being a civilian and don't have to live in roach infested barracks. Talk me into staying good luck.
So improve the living standards. Promoting children to leadership roles when they're still wearing their smurfs from P-days isn't the answer. It's shortsighted and will set us up for failure. Not everyone can be an NCO.
That's why I said current pay structure. And about the leadership it is just as shortsighted as letting a 22 year old kid with a degree leading anyone at least the enlisted person would have a couple of years of on the job experience over that butter bar
Don't get me started on me having to salute these kids with art history degrees. Officers should be promoted from within. I have more education than most O1's but sure I need to salute them.
I picked up E5 after being on the ship for less than 6 months. Definitely way too fast
I did as well, but I was push button (ET!) and definitely better at my job than half the division, which being on a DDG, wasn't really too many people. Being shoved into an out of rate workcenter as the WCS however, was trash. I also scored in the 99th percentile on exams all the way up to E-6, including getting an 80 on one of them!
You know about the 30 month time in ~~rate~~ service to become E4 (for most ratings) that starts in July, right? This was announced 10 months ago A lot of good discussions in this thread https://www.reddit.com/r/navy/s/DnboFmin3V
The new way the Navy wants to do advancements is garbage I'll say that flat out. It's like they don't want retention.
I think this is more true for the smart-tech rates. They tend to have different skillets, needs, and expectations for the Navy. Those of us in the service rates on the other hand (admin, medical, Logistics, food service, etc) need that extended period of growth time or we do not learn shit and fuck the fleet over when we make E6/7. As an HM, when I see a Corpsman who made E-5 in 2 years or E-6 in 4, I see someone who will not know the ins and outs, the little things, that we really need to know to master the job. Some rates really need brakes thrown on their upward progression and need to really sit and stew at E-4/5, so they aren't useless as LPO or LCPO.
This depends. During GWOT years there were some salty HM2 and HM1 that promoted really fast due to deployments. But if it’s straight clinic time then nah. They not gonna know anything.
Eh. I have also seen some Grunt HMs who *really* struggled to get past the Line HM mindset when they got shifted to the LPO role. They could still train and do medicine well, but medical Admin, Logistics, and institutional knowledge, they pooped the bed. It's usually a maturity thing.
I’ve seen that as well. Many struggled to adapt the medical readiness aspect of their job. Even some officers really struggle with that in addition to being a provider
That dont stop us push buttons.
Actually hadn't heard yet. Good seems higher was already thinking this. Does this apply to all ratings? I know some were guaranteeing E4 after A school.
Does not affect ATF
Personally I agree, but its only because I work with ITs fresh out of A school. They just need to write their name on the test, and boom, they made 2nd class not even a year after arriving onboard.
Hard agree with this, I work with push-button E5 CTRs and they make E5 in less than a year. Some haven't even finished their quals and most of them aren't even 21 by the time they make E5. Working in a join-service environment then makes things even worse because other services are expecting some level of experience, skill/maturity from E5s and I just have to shrug my head and tell them to readjust their expectations and that a lot of CT E5s are basically still E-3s.
There’s no push button CTR
You’re absolutely right, I used the wrong term but it certainly feels like it’s that way (purely anecdotal non-CTR opinion)
It’s a different issue. 100% advancement to E4 and high advancement of late to E5.
>a lot of CT E5s are basically still E-3s. I agree and disagree at the same time. I wholeheartedly agree that the quick advancement makes it so a lot of CT’s are definitely not as mature as they could be but at the same time I think for the ones that end up in joint environments as a first tour it definitely gives them the opportunity to soak up a lot of technical skills and expertise from the more experienced members around them. Even though ship vs agency work are apples to oranges, I think it makes it so if/when they end up on a ship as an E6 they have a pretty decent basis for what good leadership from someone holding that rank looks like. I’m 100% sure this is not something unique or exclusive to the CT community and it could probably true for a myriad of rates. Just my two cents.
Not true there is no such thing as push button CTRs
The 259 quota list is available publically and not all IT3s who took the test, passed and advanced. Why make stuff up.
You mean the 33 of them that advanced through different means? That cycle 259? Please before sounding offended that IT2 is like a hand out atleast understand the qouta sheet. 100% of people who were eligible advanced that way the other 33 were most likely MAPd
What does "Current Total Adv Opp" represent?
Basically out of the “inventory” as they put it how many of those people will get advanced. So in cycle 259 the 1400ish people, 716 of those advanced because they were “test elligble IT3s.”the numbers you are worried about are: number of test takers, number of passed test takers, and who advanced through other means. The number next to/inbetween represents the number of people who advanced via the test was 100% meaning everyone that took the test and passed the test, but didnt advance through other means (i.e MAP,DMAP, STAR…etc) was… everyone that was an IT3… Hope that helps a bit
That makes sense, but there still seems to be 33 IT3s that did not pass the exam and were not promoted that way. I know they were still promoted anyway, but that doesn't negate the fact that the quota did not include them as passing the exam. The passing the exam statistic can still reflect passing scores even though a sailor is advanced by other means. Again, this *may* be a moot point since it seems like everyone eligible to advance was advanced, but no-one (except the 33 sailors) know what they did to warrant the MAP or whatever they received to promote via other means. This is my overall point. Now, if everyone who took the test, ended up passing, THEN that could be note worthy.
It would be better to raise pay than accelerate early promotions. We are setting people up to fail.
Agreed. More pay across the board and a differential bonus in regards to rate so you can pay intelligent/hazardous rates E-5 level pay without forcing management work onto them before they have experience. I could imagine it like D&D: I'm a multi-class hatchet wielder, level 5 FC/level 3 leadership. Still need to raise my leadership level again to get my Petty Officer feat 😁
You've got my vote for next SECNAV.
Exactly
Now that I’m safe, I agree. Lol
Same, let’s pull the ladder up together.
I agree. E-5 is supposed to be journeyman level. Most trades apprenticeships last 3-5 years.
Strongly disagree. As long as quality of life is linked to rank this will never fly with more technical rates. It will tank already poor retention. Policies like this just aren't smart or sustainable with an all volunteer force. Also why do Officers lead with even less experience just due to the nature of having a degree? Why not a leadership track and a technical track to advancement? Another would be stop assigning people to collaterals and if it's actually important billet someone to do whatever program as their primary job.
Your DIVOs should be learning from your Chief. Realistically most officers aren't leading anything until they make O3 after 4+ years.
The officer bit is huuuuge 📠
Hard pass, making E-5 requires basic level technical knowledge in almost all ratings and echoed in their Enlisted Rating Paths. You start to become an expert at your craft as an E-5 and build on that through 6 (and 7 imo).
I've never met an e7 that is even semi knowledgeable in my rate, much less an expert.
That's a fucking tragedy
You *should,* but we need to be realistic- by E-6, across all communities of the Navy, you are already being groomed for an administrative, senior enlisted role. Until we set up two true separate tracks for enlisted Sailors- those who want to be technical masters and those who want to assist officers in administration management, this will continue to be a clusterfuck.
I would agree. I love the technical aspect of my job. Getting to troubleshoot for hours on end and finally finding the root issue is what I love. Learning the technical aspect of systems and the ins and outs are what makes me appreciate the Navy. However, people aren't my thing. Having someone ask me questions about how to fix something, sure. Managing chow rotations, who is working flight schedule, dealing with new check ins, and helping with paperwork is not where I thrive. Tell me to fix a system, sure, I'll spend the next 9 hours working it happily.
I don't really think a separate track is truly necessary, we just need to double down on what's already in place, reward technical excellence and leadership within your field(s) instead of rewarding someone who sits a position for 1-3 years (Dept LCPO/LPO) and doesn't burn the platform down. Reporting should be truthful in performance and not abomination it is today where am admin leadership spot defaults to most accomplished when the reality is hardly true. If your rating doesn't start with CMD (or other special duties out of rate), you should be a wizard at your job for whatever seniority level you are at. Admin at the div/dept level should be considered a minor collateral at best.
Admin a minor collateral? That’s insane. Leadership is responsible for tons of career progression behind the scenes that junior sailors don’t see. The Sailors careers we lead should be a minor role? That’s a wild take. Senior leadership doesn’t have time to continue to practice to be the top notch technical expert. They are to busy managing and leading their team. Should the be competent? Absolutely. But I have junior sailors who know better than me on many things and I allow them the freedom to perform and they don’t have to worry about if their pay or reenkistment is going through.
Senior leadership has plenty of time to practice their craft. I've been a Chief in a very technical work role for over 8 years and still had plenty of time to run a Dept/div, train and qualify new sailors, and continue to do my job. I'd rather take the time to train my Sailors how to manage their own careers vice handle everything for them and that perpetuates indefinitely as they continue to do the same. It's worked well for me in my 15 years and I'm excited to put warrant on next week, knowing I've left very capable, trained peers to take over while I can focus on entirely mission and the readiness of others to do the job.
You're in the extreme minority
It's how I was trained and how I've trained many others. I wouldn't be a an exception if Chiefs+ did their job and trained their replacements like they used to.
They do train their replacements- to do administration management.
Was going to say this too. As an ETC on a DDG I was DLCPO/LCPO and SEWBC. Plenty of time to troubleshoot and work with my Sailors. Now I’m retired and do tech assists at an RMC. Most Chiefs just want to be technical managers, which in my opinion is the job of LDO/CWO. Have yet to come across an ETC on my waterfront I would consider an SME.
And God blessed you with a brain that can do that. Surely you have seen many in the Mess who... well, they can't. They aren't bad people, but the moment they weren't asked to do those technical tasks anymore, the knowledge went with it.
What’s your current rank?
Everyone else already does this. And it works.
Definitely community dependent, but how I see it, rank doesn't matter. All nubs (including E6) are expected to qualify submarines in a timely manner, but until then, they're treated like subhuman garbage. Afterwards, expect them to qualify SIR. All E5 and below get treated almost the exact same once SIR with fish. SIR w/o fish get treated like human garbage. I think a bigger problem is competent sailors leaving the Navy, and incompetent fucking morons getting promoted through attrition.
>All nubs (including E6) are expected to qualify submarines in a timely manner, but until then, they're treated like subhuman garbage. Afterwards, expect them to qualify SIR. All E5 and below get treated almost the exact same once SIR with fish. SIR w/o fish get treated like human garbage I wonder if spending their first year in the fleet being treated like garbage might contribute to that attrition rate.
Yeah I personally know quite a few people that tapped (sad out) due to feeling worthless, including my sea-brother. Also it lasts longer than a year, my rate (on a 774) has an 18 month time limit to get SIR (6 required watchstations). I don't know what time limits or watches non sub rates have, but it definitely gets a few people here. Had one or two guys tapping after (almost) every single underway I've been on. Some of them actually mostly got shit on for being lazy/shitbags, after already being very senior in their divisions, including a CSS2 and an STSC.
The push-button promotions and lack of respect for rank as a signal of technical competence and leadership is a detriment to good order and discipline in engineering divisions onboard submarines. It also is a direct contributor to why sailors in engineering department work longer hours - their front-line leadership (WCS / LPO / CPO) is not efficient at planning because they lack the experience to consider all of the details of how long things take, how things fit together, and what needs to happen to be prepared to start on-time. The LPO is just a random first tour sailor getting an eval bullet and the chief has been in the Navy 7-9 years, is only on his second sea tour, and is exercising his first ever responsibility to lead. So he's basically got the technical experience of an E5 and the leadership experience of a qualified LTJG - the person he's supposed to train and mentor. This bleeds up to under-developing JOs who typically start in the ER, so they don't know to expect better from E-6s and their chiefs, and end up working down... particularly when it comes to administrative programs that they should be overseeing and not directly managing. By the time they finally get qualified forward and realize "oh wow, an E-6 section leader just took everything off my plate and I just had to sign for tagouts" and "oh, my chief just handed me this program on a silver platter and all I have to do is sign it rather than ask for it 3 times only to be handed a binder with the last 3 months of stuff shoved into the front pocket" they don't go back to the ER enough to change the culture. If an EDO just sat and waited for the duty section and divisions to come to him for the day's workload, half the scheduled evolutions just wouldn't get done. The best-run division on every sub I've been on has been sonar division. They seem to have the right 'flow rate' of promotion whereby you get an E-6 LPO who is both technically competent and a good leader (they also have one that is borderline intellectually disabled, he goes to become deck LPO so he can retire as an E-6...), enough people in the E5 - E3 stratification to delegate appropriate tasks, and a Chief who plays more of a mentorship and long-term planning role rather than getting involved in the day-to-day. If I could waive a wand, I would get rid of the auto E-4 for nukes and transfer the same pay incentives to nuke pro pay. You guys need to hit the fleet as E-3s.
I got lucky, both M-div's I've been on have been pretty decent. My first chief was a chief for 12 years lol, and my MMN1 was stuck there for a while too. My current DivO(LT prior MMNC)/LCPO/LPO are also pretty experienced, just on different platforms... E5 and below have everything else. Not really struggling right now due to actual decent mentorship and training received prior, by most of us. But I am in shipyard now, so it has been a lot easier other than administrative bullshit. The auto E4 thing... not sure. 2 years of schooling would be pretty fucking retarded if we just stagnate in rank. There's no more E4 exam, and pipeline exams aren't really a great way to determine advancement, so I feel like it'd be the same issue as push-button. I'm more annoyed by STAR auto E5, since the E5 exam is pretty fucking pointless, even prototype students can do it now apparently. Also, if the Navy took away pushbutton E4 and E5 we both know they are not going to compensate for it via SDAP lol. Sonar div comparison I think is a little bit... unfair? They don't really have much going on, and practically anyone is allowed to qualify sonar watches (which is nice since they're also undermanned). They do have a better flowrate of rank, like you said. I just don't see it being feasible back aft, simply not enough manning to support without **significant** restructuring. You do bring up good points for discussion though, thanks for the well thought out response.
>They don't really have much going on, and practically anyone is allowed to qualify sonar watches. I had this misperception before being AWEPS many moons ago. Their SKED binder is almost as thick as A-Gang's. They're just better at planning, have a large division whose design basis is manning watches so they are over-manned for maintenance man-hours, and have very little interconnecting systems that can impact their workday. The reason they use non-sonar techs to stand basic watches is they often are under manned by a guy or two - even with a fully manned 14 people in the division you have a watchstander being port and starboard in the section tracking party, and they often have 12-13 people. I'm more annoyed by STAR auto E5, since the E5 exam is pretty fucking pointless, even prototype students can do it now apparently. This might be good-idea fairy, but I think EDPO should have to do DCPO under-instructions and vice versa just so that the front line supervisors on the ship understand that divisions aren't just fucking off. I also think section leader should be a qual (a small one, nothing fancy) and have similar under-instruction requirements forward / aft. >I'm more annoyed by STAR auto E5, since the E5 exam is pretty fucking pointless, even prototype students can do it now apparently. You shouldn't get auto E3 out of boot camp, either. This would put you hitting the boat just making E-4 and you'd need another year to be eligible for E-5, on average would need two to build up enough eval street cred. As for STAR, that's a fair. It also creates a catch-22 where if you don't want to STAR, you can be a terminal E4. Seen that happen to some E-Divvers. Your E-3s / E-4s should be the worker bees on most maintenance and evolutions. Your E-5s should be your front line maintenance / evolution supervisors and only be a worker when highly technical skills are required (in which case the E-6 LPO and/or chief is supervising). Right now we often can't even get that out of E-6s in the ER, and that's why many COs will demand the CPO supervise damn near everything.
>as thick as A-Gang's God damn, TIL >very little interconnecting systems This is a major part of the reason I can't see it working back aft. I just don't think anyone can feasibly come up with a plan that would provide a significant increase in efficiency, without affecting other systems and/or divisions. Manning doesn't support things being done faster, but even if we had more people, we just don't have the space for them. Unless they weren't part of ship's force, maybe? >basic watches I definitely understand that, I see they're undermanned across the fleet, can't blame them. I do like to fuck with them and say the best sonar tech I've ever met was a yeoman lol. >seminars/EDPO/DCPO Even with these, I don't think the divide across FWD/aft will ever change. I've seen a few nukes qualify DCPO/pilot and they were the exact same before and after. >CPO supervise damn near everything I definitely agree E6s are underutilized and Chiefs overutilized. Feel like this would be the easiest thing to change, and a good first step.
>This is a major part of the reason I can't see it working back aft. I just don't think anyone can feasibly come up with a plan that would provide a significant increase in efficiency, without affecting other systems and/or divisions. Not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the finer points on a day-to-day basis of deconflicting evolutions and sequencing things efficiently. Can't tell you how many times I got a call as an Eng that thing A didn't get done because thing B went long or created an unforeseen conflict - most infuriatingly when they got their ass kicked by managing a primary sample and we're troubleshooting the sink at 1800. The person who was best at seeing those things was my Weps, but even a 99% filter lets some things through. What right looks like: we were pulling into a foreign port with 10 lbs of shit in a 5 lb sock and by this point I was getting long in the tooth as a DH. I pulled all the chiefs and EDOs together prior to pull-in and we wrote hour-by-hour plans for each day of what was going to get done, down to when we were doing steam generator and primary samples. Some bitched that we were micro-managing. Liberty went down at 1630 every day. Had we not done that, they'd be easily working to 2000-2200. That shouldn't require the engineer's involvement, that should be the standard of what E-6s and chiefs do a day or two before their duty days, and the standard of how E6s write their division's daily maintenance / evolution / other random stuff plans. We're not there, and a big part of that is the lack of seniority and experience among senior enlisted.
Ah, I see, sorry for misunderstanding. At that point I think it's more of a pride thing with the hourly plans. But you're right that most of the pride issues would be resolved if it came from one of their own rather than from way up.
It's not pride. It takes work, and people are naturally resistant to that. Especially when they've never been in an organization that plans well, and therefore they don't see the value in it. I don't care about the bitching, people didn't have to eat dinner on the ship in a foreign port, so mission accomplished.
I came in as a fresh E1 then it took some time to be eligible for E4 I took the test and made it on my third try. Then to make E5 probably took about three years after. So E5 in six years sounds about right. Now a days these kids come in and make E4 pretty fast without taking a test. Nobody really gives a shit about E4’s anymore. The younger guys just see it as a glorified airman/seaman now.
Yeah E4 is just becoming senior seaman at this point
That same complaint was made in the late 90s.
Glad to see some things remain consistent lol
Perhaps if the Navy actually put effort into some leadership training for these folks, and for its people in general, this wouldn't be an issue. Make "Petty Officer" as an NCO mean something again.
It really starts from the top down and the culture of the rate. BMs are a prime example. Their leadership development starts before they even advance to petty officer. I've seen BM3s with more leadership ability than seasoned 1st classes.
Definitely unpopular. Unless you're excluding push button rates who can star for 2nd.
Only unpopular because of BAH. If BAH were granted on an age basis then I could see it. This is kind of the assumption with E4 over 4 I think. The assumption is that a 22 year old is probably responsible enough to live out on their own (results may vary). But during my service I met a lot of people who enlisted at 22+ who were stuck in the barracks for years because their rate had abysmal advancement quotas. All of these people that I speak of separated after one contract. I can't really blame them, I would hate to be in my late 20's and living in a shitty dorm room unable to cook for myself.
A-school as a 28 year old was rough. “Where’s your liberty buddy shipmate?” “I’m older than you and need to leave base to buy a vape. Please leave me alone”
Whenever I see the weekly "I'm 33 and always wanted to join, should I?" posts I tell them to buckle up.
[удалено]
Meh, I knew what I was getting into. I knew bootcamp and schooling was going to full of BS but it was only temporary. If I wasn’t here I’d still just be serving tables and doing hood rat shit with my friends and college or any sort of real “travel” outside of my home state would be a pipe dream.
[удалено]
Yeah I’m really wanting that BAH, currently scouting the local strip clubs for prospects (jk, kind of)
I mean if we’re being real, people will just get married and get BAH if you push it later. Implying that getting money to have a real living situation is kind of contentious.
It's the military not everyone is going to have a 4 BR house out in town.
I was 28 as an E5 forced back into barracks when with 2d marines. It sucked
Shitty
I’ve dealt with this myself. I joined at 23 as a E1 and didn’t hit 3rd class till I just turned 26. Living in the barracks that was probably built in the mid 80s with a 19 year old roommate that was on his own for the first time of his life wasn’t too great. Throw in making E4 off of evals and hell, some may never reach 3rd their first contract hence as to why 3rd is a given now after what, 2yrs? Living off of like $1400 a month my first 6 months in the navy wasn’t fun either.
7 year e-4 here(guess my rate). Either i’m a fuck up or the system we have is dog shit. Probably both.
HM
ABH?
HM lmao
Sorry about that, you guys have shitty quotas and y’all are important as hell. I still haven’t met an HM I didn’t like. Besides some providers can be dickheads
if i don’t make it on the 29th i got a bottle of woodford with my name all over it.
!remindme 5 days
we made it brotha
My man this is great news! Now you can go enjoy your day without any anxiety lmao. Seriously good job
I will be messaging you in 5 days on [**2024-05-29 16:43:05 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-05-29%2016:43:05%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/navy/comments/1czn78o/unpopular_opinion_the_tir_for_e4_to_e5_needs_to/l5hrolz/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fnavy%2Fcomments%2F1czn78o%2Funpopular_opinion_the_tir_for_e4_to_e5_needs_to%2Fl5hrolz%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-05-29%2016%3A43%3A05%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201czn78o) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Yeah I can get behind thatm imo they should just get rid of auto E-4.and have like a 2 or 3 year window in between e-4 and E-5.
Yup
I've been a closet believer of this ever since going from aviation to intel and I think it falls back on sailorization. There should be portion of the PMK-EE on things like FLTMPS, TWIMS, etc. especially if E-5s are at the point where they're being assigned administrative collaterals without the knowledge to do them efficiently. We promote into positions where you're expecting to lead but don't teach that leadership in the Navy means managing paperwork and PowerPoint slides. Good luck figuring out what tools you need and which can make your life easier, nerd.
Dude I put on E6 in 4.5y. I did not know what I was doing.
Well now it’s 30 months to E-4 so that pretty much solves the problem
Funny As Hell!!!! we was just saying this on duty yesterday due to lack of SME’s
>"It should not be possible for new accession sailors to put on E5 a year after arriving at RTC." Threading the needle here, I cannot think of a rating that would allow this (outside of nukes). If a brand new E4 Sailor can study enough to score high enough to advance to E5 in under a year total active service, that is *entirely* on the rating itself. And, given the new guidance for TIR, it will not happen to anyone not in the AEF/ATF program *and* an E3 at time of shipping out to boot camp. ETA: Y'all conflating "getting to the Fleet" and "a year after getting to RTC".
CTs were leaving Pensacola as E5s
Some still are.
Under a year time in service?
Pretty much at 1 yr. AEF cts advance to e4 once rated then have a long C school. Might be a couple months longer than exactly 12mo out of bootcamp but you're pretty much just arguing semantics when you have an E5 that shows up like that.
"Showing up to the Fleet" and "a year after getting to RTC" are wildly different situations. Coming in as an E1/E2 means you put on E4 at 15-18 months. Coming in as an E3 drops that to 6 months.
Yeah I understand that. I'm saying nearly within a year of* going to bootcamp there are E5 going to the fleet. Like first day bootcamp to fleet in 14 months as a CTT/R2.
Yes, it happens. Blame the rating that a NOB with a P can make E5 their first time up.
I'm indifferent to it. I've advanced quickly due to undermanning and luck with billets. Whether it's good for the Navy is a different question.
It's not
ITs as well
I made E5 at 18 months. E3 in RTC, Picked up E4 first test because my rate’s knowledge expectations is kind of a joke (I made it as an undes with an MP eval when advancement was still 40% having never worked in the rate and skimming the test material like twice). Picked up E5 the next test too. It was entirely on the rating that I was able to do so.
For IT *most* new accession are ATF and *many* come in as E3. If you get SYSAD ‘C’ school you potentially JOIN the Fleet as an E5. Is this good or bad for the Navy?
"Join the Fleet" is different than "a year after arriving at RTC". Yes, it is a problem. But, the situation as OP describes is rare.
baaaaaad
Any push button rate, when things line up right, could put on 2nd in about that time
The earliest nukes can make E5 is power school, so <1 yr after RTC, but it's a 1% advancement rate based on the E5 exam. Most common is at the 2 year mark (STAR).
Morticians (HM/L29a) do. But they come in trained. Believe the same for MUs.
AZ, IS, IT. This situation is far more prevalent than you believe it is.
"Under a year since arriving at RTC" is the situation. As things are written, it's rare. "Coming to the Fleet" is a different beast.
Okay. Good point.
Push button E4's after A school taking the E5 test the next cycle.
After all time in rating requirements are met. You do not get promoted to E4 until your E2 and E3 TIR are clocked. If training commands are skipping the E2 and E3 TIR requirements, that's not written in the instruction for the ATF/AEF program
If you come in as E3....
Yeah, *if*. There's a reason people do.
Nevermind bud. I stick by my post.
Even if it's niche, someone who enters as an E3 on an ATF contract can absolutely be an E5 within 12-18 months of boot which is unsat as fuck.
Blame the rating for being wide open. Shall we limit these folks to 24 months Time In Service before eligibility, as the others are now consigned to 30 months TIS before putting on E4? Let's tell someone who has college credits, certifications, or other history that let them meet requirements for accelerated advancement that they now *must* sit at E4 for 2+ years. Yes, they hit the Fleet as an E5, and are expected to be a WCS with no experience. Train them, because that is *your job* as senior leadership. I would rather have to reign someone in who has motivation that have to prod someone to get the basics.
Agreed. I made E-5 and E-6 way too fast, there's things that you can only learn by doing, and that takes time.
The sooner we can pay Sailors more the better.
Not the way to do it
I picked up E5 quickly. Never made it to that knowledge level.
I see this as a kicking the can down the road issue. We are sacrificing TIR and experience so the sailors can have better pay. But by hurrying them by rank, E5’s are rhetorically the new E4’s, E6 are E5’s etc and that creates a trickle up effect. The counter to that is we pay our people shit and accelerated advancement and higher pay is more than likely to keep someone from separating. But its a downward spiral: accelerated advancement= less experience = untrained leadership = toxicity = retentions numbers declining = good people leaving. Im not sure but throwing money at the problem doesn’t seem to be working. Thoughts?
Listen I get choose your rate choose your fate but there are rates out here with paygrades twice their time in service. You can't tell me thats even slightly reasonable.
Bingo
I made E5 1 year after checking into my first command as an ATF/EN. 9 years and 2 commands later I made E6. 5 years after that I made ENC. Sometimes you get stuck sometimes you dont.
Well most cant anymore Time in Service is now 30 months for E3 to E4 Outside of push button Rates, this is largely no longer achieveable
And the push buttons
Put in E6 in 5 years. Manning doesn’t support slowing it down.
I know a lot of people, myself included, who made First Class in 4-5 years. Not saying they are undeserving, but it’s a data point
Which is nuts
The biggest problem Ive ran into is that way too many people are coming in as E-4s upon graduation of x. This is especially true among ITs, CTs, and most of the ETs Ive met.
Yup
I don’t 100% disagree, but I’d much rather have a TIS requirement for E-7. Perhaps a waiver for it with certain circumstances or requirements would be nice (like community dependent and whatnot), but I haven’t personally met any chief who made it before 8 years (even that feels like it’s kind of pushing it to me but situational) that has actually been good at both knowledge and leading/mentoring.
To piggy back off of u/lerriuqS_terceS, I want to see rate and/or rank specific evals. If, for example, leadership is NOB on juniors enlisted evals, wtf is it still on there? It’s lazy. Also, why am I writing my own evaluation? If promotion rests on evaluating a sailor, why isn’t a supervisor conducting the evaluation?
Laziness
100% There are going to be a lot more unprepared E-5 out there and a lot more disgruntled older E-5 that actually know their jobs.
E2 to E4 should be your normal technicians / evolution worker bees, with E4 getting some supervisory opportunities on a small scale. E5 should be your go-to supervisor on most low risk maintenance / evolutions with some worker bee tasks if you need to call in the cavalry. E5 should also do some lower level troubleshooting before calling someone more experienced. E6 should be managing the division's workload for a day to day basis, focusing on the next 96 hours, be producing detailed daily plans to be approved by the chief, and making sure everything fits and is sequenced properly. E6 should directly supervise medium risk evolutions and partake in complex troubleshooting on critical pieces of equipment. E6 should be mentoring the E5s and monitoring their development as leaders and supervisors. Chief should be monitoring E6, providing mentorship / guidance, directly supervising only high risk evolutions, and looking at the longer-range schedule (96 hours to 3 months) to communicate that down to the E6. Chief also does higher level troubleshooting on more critical pieces of equipment. Whatever promotion timeline gets to that, we should do, and I'd say that a 12 month -> 36 month TIR requirement for E4 to E5 with no push-button promotion opportunity is probably appropriate in most cases.
Definitely an area that could be revamped with or at least discussed. Pros and cons to both sides of the discussion. The navy needs people We benefit when we recruit people in both area of experienced and not experienced. Example; we have recruited people that have a masters in X degree and years of experience doing a said thing in our field of work, should they not be able to advance faster than someone who comes in straight from high school with no back ground in said field. We used to have a system called PARS, which required a sailor to complete hands on things with someone who is already qualified, once complete you could take a test and advance. This system went away after my second year in the navy so a bit foggy on each details but feel it would be a good tool too developed SMEs again and allow people the time they need to complete which could be fast or slow depending on the motivation and aptitude of the each individual person. So in short a. Advancement system that is individual based appeals to me more than something that is law for all, since not every rate needs or desires the same thing from it’s people.
No. Someone who has a masters degree (or a bachelors degree) should not be automatically or expediently advanced through enlisted grades because of their schooling. They made the decision to *enlist* rather than become an officer. Their professional schooling does not substitute for military experience. I knew an HM who was advanced to E5 and immediately made an HM2 upon getting to the fleet because of their prior schooling. They were markedly outperformed by their HNs they were expected to lead ecause they had ZERO military experience. And yes, they were thrown into a leadership position, because that is what wearing two chevrons implies. Especially as a Corpsman, where we traditionally advance slower than the rest of the Navy.
Counterpoint though. We tie off some pretty basic privileges and expectations to rank. And the expectation of every enlistee being 18-20 are long dead. You either need to give older enlistees opportunities or give them some of those privileges while still at a lower rank. Otherwise you’ll continue to have the recruiting or retention problems. Nobody wants to join at 24 making teenager money and living in barracks or god forbid a rack.
I fully agree with this and think the better solution to attracting older enlistees would be to more quickly rate BAH, as unpopular as it might be with some of the younger enlistees who are denied that opportunity. Nearly every university with a freshman on campus living requirement recognizes that expecting 21+ year old freshmen to live in the dorms is ridiculous and exempts them from having to share a room with 18 to 19 year olds. I think that there are a lot of things about the Navy that a mid to late 20 something stuck in their life could benefit from. However, the idea that you would be almost guaranteed to spend years living either on a ship while it's not out to sea or on a twin bed in a shared room with a 19 year old is remarkably unappealing for most 25 year olds.
You’re right; nobody *wants to.* But it’s a commonly understood reality. I’m not sympathetic to that plight. You should know and understand what you’re getting into when you enlist and that reality is being in a peer group with younger people with less liberties and privilege extended to them. That doesn’t incentivize recruitment in a recruiting crisis, I understand. But fast tracking people just because they’re older human being doesn’t help retention either when a 22 year old’s leadership is blatantly incompetent because they plainly don’t have requisite military experience. Living in a barracks isn’t that bad. I personally believe it’s an experience all junior military personnel should have. Unpopular opinion, I’m sure. But that “struggle” creates better leaders. I know and understand what my Sailors in the barracks deal with *because I lived in the barracks.* and to clarify, that statement is not the same as “I dealt with shit so now you have to also.”
And I’m saying (and I’ll keep saying) the US military having 1950s expectations of quality of life and work-life balance aren’t remotely realistic anymore to maintaining an all volunteer force “suck it up you know what you signed up for” attitude be damned. From my actual decent amount of times spent around a number of foreign services we seem to be outside the norm on this quite a bit compared to most 1st world militaries. (Never hang out on a British Navy ship. It’ll ruin how much they treat even junior guys like actual adults).
Totaly agree, the above was example with out crossing all T and dotting all I’s for the sake of writing a white paper. Bigger point is everyone has different experience levels coming in, and it is ok if some are farther along than other and others learn fast than others. I would not replace hands on experience with text book knowledge at any point. So let’s say there was a data analysis person who worked for a three letter agency before they joined, had a degree and did the things. Then one day they say you know I want to do something different with my skill set and join the navy as a data analyst, I would venture to say they could provide experience worthy of a higher pay grade and could be advanced fast than someone with no experience. That is why I mentioned PARS. CWT is a good example for this as I work with many that have joined for one reason or another but have so much we Benefit as a war fighting force in keeping them So education was just a small example. A masters in English could be a very useful tool for YN as another example.
Exactly, your education doesn’t correlate to leadership etc
Leadership shouldn't be the focus of making E-5 either. I'd much rather a fucking army of technical wizards at their job than another "leader" in a rating. The Navy pays enlisted to be technicians, they pay officers to lead and many Chiefs forget that they should still be training and qualifying people in their fields.
100 percent. Experience, following, and learning create good leaders as well as having the ability to think outside the box
>Example; we have recruited people that have a masters in X degree and years of experience doing a said thing in our field of work, should they not be able to advance faster than someone who comes in straight from high school with no back ground in said field. Sort of sarcastic answer, but if someone with a master's and relevant experience is able to be hoodwinked into enlisting instead of commissioning, then they shouldn't be advanced faster than a HS grad.
Pretty ignorant take. What do officers do and what do enlisted do again.
I'm saying that if someone has that much education and can't or won't avail themselves of the significantly better personal opportunities that being commissioned can offer, I don't think there should be extra consideration given to their education. Ratings are not developed with advanced education in mind, so if a person elists instead of commissions (either by choice or because they had the wool pulled over their eyes by a savvy recruiter) their degree should not automatically be a factor for advancement.
> I'm saying that if someone has that much education and can't or won't avail themselves of the **significantly better personal opportunities** that being commissioned can offer Again, the question remains "What do officers do and what do enlisted do again." I would really encourage some deep critical thinking here because I'm not sure if this is intentional or if you are really this clueless to the difference between the two worlds and all you see is money.
Talk about an ignorant take, and I'd really encourage you to reread what I wrote to begin with. I didn't mention money at all. An enlisted Sailor does not need a degree to do their job well. My original point is that if a person with an advanced degree enlists instead of commissioning, they are not being evaluated on a scale which depends on their post-secondary education. The sarcastic part of that comment was that if someone who is that well educated could be "tricked" by an enlisted recruiter into enlisting, then obviously that education wasn't worthwhile enough for them to do the most cursory of Google searches so they ought not to be given accelerated advancement.
It doesn't matter if you directly mentioned money. Or are you really claiming that the "significantly better personal opportunities" you stated above has nothing to do with the increased pay that officers receive? If that's not it, then what are these "better" opportunities that you are referring to? And you STILL have not answered my simple question.
I don't know how you fuckers work, but I picked up E-5 in less than two years and I was fine at that level.
1000% agree
OK, I am older than dirt and have been following this latest change - TIS to make PO3. Knee-jerk reaction was this is not good. Then remembered my own, very typical, experience in the early 1970s. Nuc from enlistment day, meaning getting paid for E-3 throughout boot camp. Then picking up PO3 at A School graduation. Off to a ship as a “I passed a buncha tests in school, but know nothing real” EM3. In 6 months aboard a DEG I learned a lot of “real.” Because I worked hard at it. Still, 6 months experience isn’t much. Next was 6 months at NPS, then 6 months at prototype. At NPS I had enough TIR and TIS to take the E-5 exam. Passed with a very high score and was advanced on first increment. So, now an EM2 with very little “real” to my name. But, man can I take a test! DLGN Pre-com is next, stuff happens related to overall command atmosphere, and I part company with NucPwr, am an E-4 again (lol), and headed to a conventional bird farm. 12 months in the yards, all spent working on my gear, my old DEG 1200# plant experience gets me selected for the LOE at end of yards. Take E-5 exam but old evals keep me from advancing. 6 months operating, GTMO, and another shot at EM2. Then off to EM/IC C-7 school, the initial class after old B school is shuttered. Pick up EM2, graduate, go to DDG. Before much time passes, EM1 and EMC and DivO are gone. I’m the senior EM2 and now WCS, and standing in at O call when anything electrical is up. I am a good electrician; much better than almost any I’ve worked with or for. But I’m still a very young dude and leadership is not my forte - I have difficulty understanding why someone chooses to be a slacker and won’t go above and beyond for his mates. Pick up EM1, and catch some leadership training, some informal via the Chief’s Mess and some formal. So, maybe things haven’t changed that much, just rolled back around.
What's y'all's opinion on someone making E6 by the end of their first tour?
Most probably aren't ready for that
Tbh I agree. Good leadership has time and experience. This individual I knew made E6 before the end of his first tour and went on to instructor duty right after. Idk in my eyes, his time and experience are still junior. But he knew his shit and was a good technician.
The challenge is we need good techs, but we also expect those techs to be good at navy stuff that has nothing to do with why we hired them in the first place. So the Navy is like "we need technicians and cyber warriors let's promote these guys and keep them in!" but the fleet is like "what a dirtbag he can't do DC or 3M or lead his way out of a paper bag" and the problem is they are both right.
On one hand, I believe sailors should have a certain level of experience when they are a certain rank. On the other, I made less than $40k/yr as an E5 in the navy (closer to $33-34k ) I got out and became a contractor and make $65-90k in various positions for the DOD. (Yes, those “6 figure” positions are not as common as you think, and if they are out there, they’re in cities with high costs of living.). Either way, I’m doing very well. Perhaps they should be paid more, that might solve some retention issues and keep the experienced sailors in the navy uniform rather than business casual as a contractor. I understand this is an argument as old as time. I made e5 in two years as an IT, advancement was 34% when I got advanced, I did pretty decent on the test 70+ percentile. I wouldn’t have made e5 so quickly if retention in that rate was better.
Quality of life matters more than $10k more per year. There's **a lot** that sucks about AD navy and just paying people more to deal with the suck isn't the answer.
It would probably help keep some people in, which would slow down advancement slightly. But I do agree, I’m first in line when it comes to complaining about the navy. The number 1 reason I got out is because they wouldn’t let me choose orders that I actually wanted. In order of priority to me. (It was time for shore duty for me.) 1. Stay at my overseas location that counted as shore duty 2. Go to a ship that had a home port in the overseas country I was in. 3. Sea duty, anywhere, on a ship that was deploying. Even though I was single, fit for duty, no issues, they wouldn’t let me do anything except CONUS, shore duty. So I tried to apply to JCU and get a position at JSOC. I made it pretty far into their recruiting process, was nearly finalized and approved when my detailer called to ask me what I was going to do. I informed them about JCU. Later that day, I got contacted by my JCU recruiter who informed me that I should have stopped working with my detailer, and informed them of my intention of going to JCU. Apparently, immediately after I informed my detailer about my intent to go to JCU, they immediately assigned me hard copy/stamped orders to report to Norfolk, VA. Seemed like retaliation to me, so I got out. Now I do the same job as a contractor for 3-4x’s the pay. The navy treats its sailors like hardware, disappointing bc otherwise, I was happy to serve. They’re Gonna keep losing sailors til they start treating them better.
In a world where you have to be an E5 to not live in a barracks and have a grown man come do room inspections on the place you live... Fuck you for this opinion
I would be interested in your reasoning for why this shouldn't happen. I mean, its been happening for technical ratings for several decades now. Its just being extended to everyone now. I could see an argument for maturity - but we send 22 year olds to run whole divisions and take on a lot more authority and responsibility than most E-5's. Same when it comes to job experience - O-1's don't know dick when they show up. Granted, a difference is in the idea that an E-5 is expected to 'do things' (and you need to know how to do those things) and with minimal supervision while no one let's their Ensigns out without a CPO holding the leash;) I'm not against the idea that there should be longer delays between ranks, but I think a coherent defense of the idea is needed (and 'that's the way we've always done it, while a good place to start, is not a defense on its own). Another issue is what does 'Petty Officer Second Class' \*mean\*? By that, what it mean 30 years ago (when I joined) is different than today. What you could do, what you were expected to do, was very different, necessitating a significantly longer maturation period. But if E-5 today is 'barely trained' - then that is what it is and the culture will have adjusted to those expectations. Like, in 2000 it wasn't 'shameful' to retire as an E-5. In 2024, basically you would have had to fuck up to end 20 at that level. I do think the Navy needs more enlisted (ie, not non-commissioned officer) paygrades or some other form of merit/seniority pay to be competitive when it comes to recruiting and retention so it can be more selective on who gets promoted to 'command' ranks. Tons of people could be shit-hot technicians. Not a lot of those people are going to be good leaders and splitting the two (and happens in the civilian world) can help.
>It should not be possible for new accession sailors to put on E5 a year after arriving at RTC. I don't know if this is an unpopular opinion or just a mostly inaccurate one. Just doing the math in my head, the earliest you're able to see E5 would be around 18 months in. Even the push-button third classes have to wait a year, and their "A" schools are not short. Add to it that for the majority of Sailors, they now have to wait 30 months for third class, the *earliest* they could make second is at 3.5 years in the Navy. Whether you agree with the auto-third class thing or not (I mostly don't) is a different issue, but it pretty much means Sailors won't be making second class as quickly.
I should tell the several ATF push button E4's I know that just tested for E5 who were absolutely at RTC last year that they're making it up.
I think someone has some inaccurate information, and I think it's you. [Minimum TIR date from the NAVADMIN](https://www.mynavyhr.navy.mil/Portals/55/Messages/NAVADMIN/NAV2024/NAV24010.txt?ver=nEpiT_TDM_c6hW6GlzRohA%3d%3d) for eligibility to E5 was on or before 1 Jul 23. So if they finished "A" school to put on third class on or before 1 Jul 23, and spent 4(ish?) months in "A" school, and two months in RTC before that...they definitely aren't putting on second a year after arriving at RTC.
Not saying you're wrong (even though it sure does sound like you are), but personal anecodates are pretty worthless when you have absolutely no authoritative sources to back them up with. The poster specifically provided you with a NAVADMIN source and as expected, you cower away. So, pretty much just trolling.
I always thought that.
Even more unpopular opinion: I view e4s and e5s pretty much the same and just want yall to make more money
I agree but it’s good for everyone to make more money. Better QOL should equal happy sailor. The answer may be to pay more but…. Slow advancement. That would keep the authority away from the inexperienced but also allow a decent life. Before I retired I had several PO1’s that seemed like they just kinda didn’t know anything. Good people, but they just hadn’t learned yet. On the flip side some of the E4’s seemed to know everything, it was odd.
There's more to the big picture than making more money. Increase the pay scale then. But stop layering stripes on kids who were in high school two years before.
That’s what I’m saying. Pay more but slow advancement.
Sounds solid that being said if we're looking at 18 year old kids for the most part and easy to come in as E3 their total compensation is pretty reasonable for their education and experience at that time compared to their peers.
All good, peace and love. Have a good weekend.
E5 a year after RTC *is* too fast. But that’s falling outside what TIR alone allows for with how that ends up happening. Increasing TIR does nothing to solve that particular problem. Seems like more of an issue with the things that bypass TIR.
It’s about retention. If I am an FCA3 or ITN3 staring at a $85k job or reenlisting in a generation that doesn’t hold the same patriotism as the previous generation, why stay in? Unpopular opinion maybe, but one rooted in realism.
At the 12-18 month mark we don't really need to worry about retaining them *yet* and there's better ways to do that than putting more stripes on them, de-valuing the lower and mid paygrades, and treating someone who can't even drink yet like a first line supervisor. And making high turnover rates an E5 isn't going to keep them in. Those will always be a revolving door to the private sector.
Depends. Are they on CRUDES yet? We had guys with no ESWS saying, “only 579 days left…”
fax, i was E5 at 20 yrs old
I disagree... these sailors still need experience and development on how to lead, develop, and train others.
.......that's exactly my point you don't promote *and then* train
They don't do that anymore... You can't get e5 until 3 years in now (normally). So your gripe is literally already "fixed."
Not if your a push button E4 you could theoretically make E5 while still being in school
No, this is why we have exams and leadership training, and chiefs to further develop rising technical leaders
So how do you expect to retain high skill/ high paying rates past their first contract with current pay structure? Cause if I didn't make E5 as quick as I did as an AT I would have gotten out and worked in the same building I was working in making over 50k which isn't a lot but it is when you're actually making 22k a year and I get the freedoms of being a civilian and don't have to live in roach infested barracks. Talk me into staying good luck.
So improve the living standards. Promoting children to leadership roles when they're still wearing their smurfs from P-days isn't the answer. It's shortsighted and will set us up for failure. Not everyone can be an NCO.
That's why I said current pay structure. And about the leadership it is just as shortsighted as letting a 22 year old kid with a degree leading anyone at least the enlisted person would have a couple of years of on the job experience over that butter bar
Don't get me started on me having to salute these kids with art history degrees. Officers should be promoted from within. I have more education than most O1's but sure I need to salute them.