Continuation board?

[ITCMKen]

At least call it what it is. I guess the SERB term didn't play well last time so we're going to call it something else this time.

Make no mistake this is a Selective Early Retirement Board.

We can play word games all day, but changing the name, well its just bad form.

Oh and by the way, the Exxon Valdez is still out there on the high seas, they just changed the name of the ship.

[Yggdrasil]

As a PS1 with nine years in, I can't say that I'm sad to see this - seeing as how my rating is about 190% manned for those over 20 years - for those of us coming up, this opens up the Chief slots.

At the same time, I can see why this would suck for some. It probably would have been best if they did this by rating.

[jeffersj]

This is simply a continuation of the process of eliminating "deadwood" that was started when the Navy initiated HYT roughly 20 years ago. At least here there is the chance for those subject to the new policy to be screened for fitness to continue, unlike HYT which simply targets everyone regardless of ability and which is very stingy with waivers.

[RMCS(SS) FLEWWELLIN/RET]

yes all members of the CPO community should be screened..the lame excuse they have already rcvd intensive screening due to their positional authority is a joke..and the recent letter in the navy times dated 2/16/09 was absolutely correct in the response by Master Chief Driscoll..just because you are a Fleet/Force/CMC Master Chief should not exempt you from any continuation board..lastly if you are just going from one shore command and or staff to another and not back to sea for a 3-4 year tour during a 8-10 stretch you should be getting asked to get out of the NAVY..(the sooner the better)..we are a sea going service..and you as the most senior leadership available should not only know this but practice what you preach..

V/R
RMCS(SS) Flew

[Voyager57]

Did you ever notice that every new MCPON "fixes" the CPO community first as a part of their assuming the mantle? I was really tired of seeing that pattern in my last 10-12 yrs before I retired and it became utterly predictable. This continuation board is just more of the "all eyes on me and the great things I'm doing and are going to do to straighten out my enlisted navy". Unfortunately the CPO mess is usually the easiest target for new MCPONs. Officers look the other way and junior enlisted applaud the focus because they think it will open a great number of new advancement billets which is incorrect.

I would venture to guess that the new boards will NOT weed out a large number of CPOs who have went astray but, it will look good on paper for someone up the chain. I also wish that just once a newly appointed CNO would declare "we have to fix our 05's and 06's" with the same fervor that recent MCPONs have went after the CPO mess. Why not apply continuation boards to any rank be it officer or enlisted if they are beyond 20 years...because the only fictitious animal that ever needs fixing at a senior level is the CPO (sarcasm intended).

[Yggdrasil]

Officers look the other way and junior enlisted applaud the focus because they think it will open a great number of new advancement billets which is incorrect.

Please, oh PLEASE, explain the logic behind it not opening up billets. Explain the math behind it, because I'm just DYING to know.

[Voyager57]

Ok, but I will have to answer your question with a question. How many members do you think there are in your rating with 20+ years that are screw-ups? Would the answer be one, five, maybe ten? If after the first continuation board we could see the numbers separated in your rating...I would guess they are very small. My reasoning is based on my last 18 yrs of active duty as a CPO. I knew of very few CPOs that would have been released under this program. Normal retirement attrition and hyt requirements separates the vast majority of Sailors above the 20 yr mark at the correct points.

If you're resentful of the lack of advancement opportunity to senior levels in your rating maybe a better place to focus would be the past excessive advancement rates.

Here's a truism...despite the propaganda, not every deserving Sailor is going to reach the highest enlisted ranks due to finite end strength numbers. Not much different than any civilian organization with limited upward mobility. Work hard, prepare yourself as much as possible and hang in there and if at 20 yrs you haven't achieved what you think you should have...retire and move on.

[Yggdrasil]

As a PS, a former PN at that, I've always had access to everyone's... "dirt." Yes, there are plent of people I know who would be targeted. I'm not sure exactly when you retired, but we have a forced-distribution eval that didn't exist prior to 1996, I believe.

In addition to those Chiefs with NJP's and PRT failures, they're also targeting those with a "Promotable" eval after having more than a year onboard their present command, or two or more consective "Promotable" evals at the same command. And that's where the bulk of those getting the boot will come from - considering the fact that for E7-E9, "promotables" make up at least 50% of those evaluated.

[jeffersj]

With regard to the forced distribution eval, it came in during the tenure of the late ADM Boorda when he was CNO. That would put it around the time Yggdrasil mentions.

Yggdrasil, you also have to remember that advancements are driven by fleet needs. Just because the Navy tells 20 Chief Bosun's to retire before HYT does not mean they need to advance 20 BM1's - they're also looking at billet structures to see if they need x number of BM Chiefs at a command or in the fleet.

Additionally, everyone has to remember the only clear picture a board has of a Sailor is their evals/fitreps, be it a selection board, continuation board, or what have you. A lot of deserving Sailors get passed over because their records did not give the board what it needed to put them in perspective with the other candidates that cycle. A lot of guys get selected because their evals/fitreps gave the board the impression they were able to do the job when in fact someone didn't have the intestinal fortitude to document substandard performance, with the result the Sailor got a decent report bacause an adverse one could not be justified.

NJP - yes, that can be a stopper unless the person shows they learned and moved forward from the issue. Same goes for PFA failures. I have less tolerance for PFA failures as with all the resources out there I see no excuse for a Sailor to not pass with at least a "Good-Low" score and within specs on body composition.

[Yggdrasil]

Yggdrasil, you also have to remember that advancements are driven by fleet needs. Just because the Navy tells 20 Chief Bosun's to retire before HYT does not mean they need to advance 20 BM1's - they're also looking at billet structures to see if they need x number of BM Chiefs at a command or in the fleet.

Understood - but those 20 extra BMC aren't helping, are they? Heck, getting rid of those 20 BMC's might mean that 5 BM1's can advance, where zero would have if we kept those BMC's. Either way, it's a step in the right direction.

I understand what you're saying about the selection board... but through the same process... people WILL be weeded out.

[Voyager57]

A couple of comments here...first, thanks for the info regarding "promotables", I didn't know that the P's are a part of the new bullseye and I'm sorry to hear that. At some of my smaller commands we had some very fine "P"s that by sheer numbers could not be ranked higher than that. I would have hated to see them forced out earlier than thier hyt. I could also add that I've seen Sailors stay at the P level because the CO or OIC redetermined the ranking order after being advised differently by thorough ranking boards. This happened at two of my commands and is a perfectly legal practice but will now have even more serious consequences. All in all, it's a sad day if this is what the navy has had to resort to in order to increase advancements.

Secondly, I retired in '08. I know of the "dirt" you speak of at least at the E6 level from sitting a 7 selboard prior to my retirement. I can tell you that Sailors with ANY questionable event in thier last 5-8 most recent years were not selected for promotion. My panel actually gave back a small portion of unfilled selection billets due to a lack of qualified Sailors. From that experience I am guessing that the screw ups beyond 20 yrs are being separated at their next hyt gate due to non-selection. The continuation boards may cut a year or two off of their service and that's always a good thing. Good luck to you.

[jeffersj]

A couple of comments here...first, thanks for the info regarding "promotables", I didn't know that the P's are a part of the new bullseye and I'm sorry to hear that. At some of my smaller commands we had some very fine "P"s that by sheer numbers could not be ranked higher than that. I would have hated to see them forced out earlier than thier hyt. I could also add that I've seen Sailors stay at the P level because the CO or OIC redetermined the ranking order after being advised differently by thorough ranking boards. This happened at two of my commands and is a perfectly legal practice but will now have even more serious consequences. All in all, it's a sad day if this is what the navy has had to resort to in order to increase advancements.

Secondly, I retired in '08. I know of the "dirt" you speak of at least at the E6 level from sitting a 7 selboard prior to my retirement. I can tell you that Sailors with ANY questionable event in thier last 5-8 most recent years were not selected for promotion. My panel actually gave back a small portion of unfilled selection billets due to a lack of qualified Sailors. From that experience I am guessing that the screw ups beyond 20 yrs are being separated at their next hyt gate due to non-selection. The continuation boards may cut a year or two off of their service and that's always a good thing. Good luck to you.

I've seen the same thing with rankings and forced distribution. The only way I got around it when I went from an EP to an MP one time was to have the comment inserted "Would be an EP except for forced distribution requirements". Have also seen/dealt with the issue on the CO deciding what the rankings would be before the reports were written. Sometimes I won getting them to change their minds, sometimes I didn't. If not, I supported their call, as I should.

Yggdrasil, my point was simply that getting rid of a Sailor in one rate didn't automatically open an opportunity for someone to advance. Yes, the continuation boards are a step towards hopefully increasing advancement, just like HYT was a step in increasing advancement when it was instituted 20+ years ago.

[RandomFT2]

I've seen my share of chief's that really don't measure up and really don't perform like they should. Yes they should be cut. I've seen good sailors E1-E6 dropped because they weren't within standards but could run a PRT faster than most others. And meanwhile I've seen E-7's and E-8's that are obviously out of standards but are allowed to stay in. The message being sent down the chain of command is not a good one.

[PAMICH]

My extra infusion to this thread is I'm seeing the Navy down sizing and finding ways to save cash long term . Take for instance the team I'm on. We are merging with two other teams . The first reason was the bases they are on are being BRACed. So they were reassigned to us. But....... Big Navy didn't write the manpower document to include these billets with ours, they actually wrote ours for less billets. Now we have Sailors here and we are scrambling to find them other commands to serve with. I once heard an Admiral say "If you work hard for the Navy you'll always have a place here". I see that's not really true anymore.

[Yggdrasil]

I once heard an Admiral say "If you work hard for the Navy you'll always have a place here". I see that's not really true anymore.

I believe that the Admiral was right. The key phrase is "If you work hard for the Navy." And I bet that the number of dirtbags in the Navy will exceed the number of the ones that will be shown the door.

As for the rest of the quote, "You'll always have a place here," in many cases, it's true - but sometimes, that place may not be the place that the Sailor wants to be. Back in 2002, during the "MA Mania," I had an SH3 on my ship who was coming up on High Year Tenure. He wanted so bad to stay in the Navy - he even had the stereotypical look of a 20-year First Class (i.e., slightly overweight, big bushy moustache, & aviator-frame glasses). The problem is, he let his pride in his rating get in the way. SH, the whole time I've been in the Navy, has always been known for its poor advancement. Combine this with the fact that he was a "poor test taker," (a concept which I do not agree with, which is why I put it in parentheses - but that's for a different discussion), and the fact that he was fully qualified for MA at the time, and would have gotten the full recommendation from the MAC on our ship, and you'd see that it was own fault for being sent home packing. MA was his one chance to stay Navy, but he pissed it away because he didn't want to change his rate - even though he was over 40 points shy off of his previous SH2 exam.

So... I think that for most, there will always be a place in the Navy - but for those who are just barely good enough to not be let go, should they want to stay Navy, it's going to be on the Navy's terms, not theirs.

[jeffersj]

I believe that the Admiral was right. The key phrase is "If you work hard for the Navy." And I bet that the number of dirtbags in the Navy will exceed the number of the ones that will be shown the door.

As for the rest of the quote, "You'll always have a place here," in many cases, it's true - but sometimes, that place may not be the place that the Sailor wants to be. Back in 2002, during the "MA Mania," I had an SH3 on my ship who was coming up on High Year Tenure. He wanted so bad to stay in the Navy - he even had the stereotypical look of a 20-year First Class (i.e., slightly overweight, big bushy moustache, & aviator-frame glasses). The problem is, he let his pride in his rating get in the way. SH, the whole time I've been in the Navy, has always been known for its poor advancement. Combine this with the fact that he was a "poor test taker," (a concept which I do not agree with, which is why I put it in parentheses - but that's for a different discussion), and the fact that he was fully qualified for MA at the time, and would have gotten the full recommendation from the MAC on our ship, and you'd see that it was own fault for being sent home packing. MA was his one chance to stay Navy, but he pissed it away because he didn't want to change his rate - even though he was over 40 points shy off of his previous SH2 exam.

So... I think that for most, there will always be a place in the Navy - but for those who are just barely good enough to not be let go, should they want to stay Navy, it's going to be on the Navy's terms, not theirs.

I'll concur here. I've seen lots of good Sailors get shown the door because they wouldn't adapt to changing situations and do what they needed to be competitive, which includes changing rating if needed. The days are long past where you could come in, find a rate/rating you're comfortable with, and if you keep out of trouble do 20 years and get a retainer check. I went from MM to BM at the First Class level - not real comfortable with it, but it was the most viable option for me professionally. Didn't want to do my second recall to active duty as a reservist - pulled my papers, did the tour, stayed in vice retiring (the reason's not for discussion here) and got my Anchors as a result. All because I had to adapt to the fact that at the time the Navy needed Bosun's more than they needed snipes.

Same is true in the civilian world - companies (including the federal government) are constantly reviewing jobs, needs with regard to personnel, etc., and if you're not prepared to adapt to the changes eventually you'll be told to pursue your professional development elsewhere.

[PAMICH]

Do I feel divided here or what? Dirt balls vs. hard workers vs. rate grabbers vs. committed to excellence Sailors. Dirt balls, the ones you can give a routine task to a dozen times and they will screw it up... they got to go. Dirt balls who don't care about others, equipment, mission acomplisment, Navy pride.... they got to go. Dirt balls who come to work every day and don't do a thing other than breathing...they got to go. Now I have had hard working 1sts and 2nds who do their job exceptionally but they are not interested in advancing to a higher position. The ones you can count on being at their station ahead of time with things complete. Never give you hassle, don't stir up a fuss, highly skilled and trained, they just do their job assigned to them without question are the ones I can't see asking to leave because they didn't advance. Now you have rate grabbers. Some ratings are fast moving rates. Some are really slow. One of my Sailor buddies I came up with, and I always give him hell about it, were both 2nds taking the rating exam. I outscored him by 40 points on the final multiple. He was advanced. I was PNA. When I made first he made Chief, My first class FMS was higher than his Chief score. I should have seen the writing on the wall but I enjoyed my rating and I excelled at every aspect. He moved on to Senior. The following year I earned Chief. He is now a LDO. This is my second look for Senior IF I don't qualify, I'll be heading for HYT. Do I feel hurt, you bet ya, should I have changed ratings to something I wouldn't be happy about, maybe... I came in the Navy to serve and get educated to be a tech. And I don't know if I would want a PS pulling glow rods out of a reactor or a SH tuning a Radar, or a QM firing missles just because their rate is overmanned. So I'm really divided here on a correct solution other than convenience.

[Yggdrasil]

And I don't know if I would want a PS pulling glow rods out of a reactor or a SH tuning a Radar, or a QM firing missles just because their rate is overmanned. So I'm really divided here on a correct solution other than convenience.

These are bad examples. You're chosing examples where people are in ratings that require lower ASVAB scores trying do the job of someone with higher ASVAB scores. SH to MA is not the same as PS to Nuke.

Remember this as well - the majority of people coming into the Navy are young people coming out of high school who don't know what they want to do in the Navy. All they know when they join is that they want the Navy - the organization. They want to travel and see the world. So before someone lets pride in their rate become the death of their career, they might want to think about what brought them to the Navy in the first place.

[PAMICH]

Sorry I wasn't even thinking of the ASVAB angle. Besides any Sailor can increase their score with a little studing they may not have been able to get previously. I know some brilliant CMDCMs whose ratings weren't a high ASVAB rate. I always wanted to fix gear. That's what I trained for and that is my skill set. To retrain all over for some other rate that I'm not interested in or don't have the skillset or have no interest in doing can be baffling to me. Take for instance this BB. I can't type fast so I would suck at YN or PS. There may be YN or PS who are deathly afraid of working with electricity. So for me to train in that field would be counter productive and vice versa. Now if a skill set would totally go away, then that is a horse of a different color. Like Coal tender or Sail maker or Burrow handler. I actually would enjoy a tour on the new LCS.Where a small crew would do the entire mission and the Skipper actually pilots the ship him/herself and every Sailor needs to chip in in every aspect. No Unions. Sort of like Subs.

[hcshawk]

I welcome this in EVERY way....

If you're a hard charger, you've got nothing to worry about.

If you're worried....then you'll probably "make board". :D

[jeffersj]

I welcome this in EVERY way....

If you're a hard charger, you've got nothing to worry about.

If you're worried....then you'll probably "make board". :D

Bad choice of words in the final statement. With regard to the continuation board everyone will "make board". What you need to worry about is not being selected to continue, unless you simply don't care.

[hcshawk]

Bad choice of words in the final statement. With regard to the continuation board everyone will "make board". What you need to worry about is not being selected to continue, unless you simply don't care.

I'm crystal clear on the process...was a tounge-in-cheek statement....a bit of humor, if you will.