Re-Classing and it's effects on small unit Leadership

[Gold_Reaper]

There was once a time where soldiers and officers alike were dedicated to their MOS & Branch upon enlisting and comissioning. However, this has changed, and I'd like to elaborate on its effects on small unit leadership.

Speaking from experience, my first NCOIC was a re-class. He was brand new to the MOS, and I was brand new to the branch. We went down range, and it was awkward at times because I knew more about his MOS than he did by far because I learned all aspects of our operation and was constantly engaged. Also, the soldiers clearly knew more about the MOS because they had deployed already, and knew exactly what to do once we hit ground. This placed him in an awkward position because while the soldiers respected his rank, they clearly had the upper hand in knowledge.

I won't go too much into detail because I know you guys and gals see where I'm going here. So sound off please because I'd like to hear what others have to say about this. What are your opinions on soldiers, NCOs and Officers changing their MOS/Branch?

[MSMUROTC]

I think it really depends. Technical knowledge and leadership aren't synonymous. Also, it's a lot easier to learn technical knowledge (or at least familiarity) than it is to learn how to plan, lead, manage, etc.

I think soldiers (E through O) should switch as much as they want because ultimately, you're looking at an issue that deals with recruitment, retention, and motivation.

That being said, there should be some additional training for soldiers who seek to re-class ... i.e. if you're a captain who wants to branch transfer, you should have to go to portions of the basic and advanced course for that new branch.

I get it that the school house doesn't equal real experience, but fixing TRADOC schools is a separate issue. If you're not willing to let people branch transfer, what's the solution? Keep people in jobs they don't want to be in?

I'm sure the learning curve is a little steep / awkward, but I'm sure your NCOIC was fine by the end of the deployment, right?

[chucksnee]

Thats a leadership failure.

No way in hell, (and I'm retired Aviation) would we let that happen...

Just becasue you have rank, does not mean you know your job, and the CoC should be-able to see that...and in turn let him know that...however it maybe done....Now, when we had a situation like that in my units....no matter the rank, if he was a re-tread...he/she was never put into a leadership position, until he demonstrated he/she was able to understand there job. He/she may have been put next in charge under the squad leader, but that was it...until he/she learned the job.....

Again, if the CoC cannot figure that out then it is a leadership failure...

[MSMUROTC]

I respectfully disagree. For argument's sake, if he was a PSG for a light wheeled mechanic platoon and had transferred in from heavy wheeled mechanic MOS, he might not know all the particulars or something. However, knowing how to rebuild an engine or something versus all of the other duties that a platoon sergeant has ... the leadership / rank duties are more applicable to an E-7 than to an E-5 at that point.

For example, there's no way that a signal officer could possibly know how to operate every single computer and radio system, in detail, better than his individual soldiers do. But he doesn't need to understand every single system to be a leader of that unit.

I know there are people in here hostile to officership in general, and the same principle applies: you don't need to be a technical expert in all aspects to be a leader. should there be some knowledge and aptitude? and willingness to learn? absolutely. but you don't need to be a technical expert to lead.

[chucksnee]

If you will re-read the original post, it is NOT about leadership it is about MOS knowledge....

I do agree with you though....a PSG is a PSG no matter the MOS...Well it should be anyway...

So i'll play along with you....

I'm an E-6 Aviation Flight PSG, been doing it for 2 years....My NCOERS are all 1's across the board for the last 2 years, however, I decide to re-enlist for 11B, would you as my new 11B 1SG put me in charge of a platoon that is going into combat?

[MSMUROTC]

Well, the question was "What are your opinions on soldiers, NCOs and Officers changing their MOS/Branch?" I'll split the difference with you and say the root of the question was about MOS knowledge and how it impacts leadership.

Your proposal: At that level of rank across that wide a gap of job, no, I wouldn't be comfortable with it. At the same time, I'm pretty sure that there are MOS / rank limitations on switching jobs, such that your scenario is pretty much impossible whereas mine is a bit more realistic. I didn't mean to imply that job switching should be allowed at every level. But even at the E-5 (or 1LT) level, I'd be a bit leery of it.

I think it ultimately falls on that individual & the chain of command. There are probably some E-5 aviation mechanics who could team-lead the hell out of an Infantry team better than some 11B20's. Not exactly sure of the regulations and all that.

Ultimately, my answer to the question is that I think it's good to allow people flexibility, within reason, because soldiers that can pick their jobs are soldiers who are happier, will stay in service, etc. The caveat is, of course, within reason. If you want to switch jobs completely, you probably should have to take a cut in rank. But if they're analogous and your rank is relatively low, then no, you shouldn't have to take a cut.

For gold_reaper, I can't give anything more than a vague answer because 1. I don't know the specifics and 2. I don't know the individuals involved.

[chucksnee]

I agree....Mine was a drastic change, your was not....However, I still would not put a UH-60 guy in charge of a CH-47 flight platoon....he may know basics of aviation but has no clue on how/what to do in the 47 world....

Agree again, there needs to be specific details to the information, or you'll just get vague answers...
Like we provided....

[FatCat40]

Seen this on many occasions. IMO one should not be able to re-class after rank of E5 (well since the promotion system is so screwed up now can't really say that since E5 is 2 yrs in now so lets just say after 12 yrs TIS) because how can you "supervise" troops in your MOS when you don't have the technical knowledge required to do the job yourself let alone supervise lower enlisteds? I'm supply and my last battalion S4 was a SFC who re-classed from a combat arms MOS as an E6 to get promoted (his words not mine). This guy had the supply knowledge of an E3 yet was the senior logistician for the battalion. Guess who battalion leadership ultimately came to for supply guidance? Not to not be a team player but I felt abused because this guy made hundreds of dollars a month more than I did. I'm a firm believer in if you wear the rank and earn the pay then know/do the job dammit!!!!

[former31B]

I have to agree with MSMUROTC. Reclassing will continue because it is a rentention/motivation incentive. IMO, it should become even more lenient. At a certain point, yes, a person wishing to reclass should be asked to take a rank cut. It all depends on the rank and MOS that we are talking about though.

For example, my MOS (MP) gets a lot of retreads, primarily from the infantry. An E6 11B that becomes an MP will probably not have much trouble adjusting. Sure, he will not have the law enforcement knowledge of junior soldiers but as an E6, he will likely not work the road anyway. If he does, it'll be as a Patrol Supervisor, which basically entails ensuring that the junior soldiers are doing their job professionally...something that all E6s should be able to do in all MOSs. Similarly with an E7...a PSG is a PSG. An E5 is a different story. As an MP, he will be a senior patrol and/or a Patrol Supervisor but either way, the law enforcement knowledge is more important at that rank, in which case it might be beneficial to everyone if he reclasses as an E4.

I think everyone should be able to reclass if they want to. The alternatives just don't help anyone. You are either going to have a guy that hates life and does the bare minimum because he hates his job or, this guy leaves the service altogether. Either way, the Army, not just the particular unit, is down a much needed man. At the end of the day, it really is what's best for the Army as a whole that matters.

[chucksnee]

I think everyone should be able to reclass if they want to. .

I believe we all agree...but, if it came down to your MOS (MP) and you put that E6 that just re-classed from "COOK" would you really want him/her out in a patrol car with a somewhat knowledgeable E3?

Anyway this is not about if you should be able to re-class it is about MOS knowledge when you do re-class....

[former31B]

I believe we all agree...but, if it came down to your MOS (MP) and you put that E6 that just re-classed from "COOK" would you really want him/her out in a patrol car with a somewhat knowledgeable E3?

Anyway this is not about if you should be able to re-class it is about MOS knowledge when you do re-class....

If the typical E6 was actually expected to work the road, then no, I wouldn't want him out on patrol making stuff up. I do agree that a person should have the knowledge required for the rank in any MOS but that doesn't necessarily mean that they need all the technical knowledge of all the ranks below them. The mid to senior NCO ranks are a perfect example. With the exception of some more technical MOSs, very few senior NCOs engage directly in the technical matters of their MOS. For the most part, they are in staff positions and just like officers, a PSG should be able to adjust fire and be a PSG for any platoon in the Army; likewise a CO should be able to command any company in the Army. There are more similarities then differences at that level across positions. Obviously, it requires some familiarity with the mission of the MOS but not necessarily all of the technical aspects. I concede though that we may arrive at a different conclusion when you are talking about something like supply, aviation, finance, ect.

[SGT_B]

I am a good example. The Army,in its infinite wisdom, felt that I should reenlist as a finance guy. I was commo before, as a SGT, I have no clue what is going on in the finance side, am still waiting to go to AIT.
I contribute where i can, am reading the AR's and learning everything I can on my own untill school date.
Luckily for me I am the lowest ranking person on this staff section. As for technical knowledge, a private fresh out of AIT would know more about Finance than me, and it would be very strange. But, I am learning on my own, hopefully by the time i get to school, I can teach the damn thing.

Also, I am the only Airborne, Air assault qualified person as for as the eye can see,lol, that makes it very interesting. I guess I can add chairborne to the list now......sighhhhh....

[chucksnee]

How did the Army "MAKE" you re-up for Finance?

[sarge89]

I agree with the OP but....in some areas like the Reserves or Guard units soldiers have no choice but to reclass for a number of reasons..unit MTOE change or promotion. When I was on AD I was a 63B (light wheel) and after 4 years I really wanted to reclass, they told me NO so I left the Army. I was a great soldier, graduated top of my BT class, learned a new trade (female who had no mechanic experience),always top of my PT score etc...but the Army (1992) didn't care enough to retain me. I went on to the Reserves and picked up 2 other MOS' (admin/retention) and then another in the Guard (finance). In these jobs I was able to move up in rank and still pick up my job and be a leader...but...I would have never had asked as an E6 to reclass as an MP in the Guard. I knew that I would have no skills that say a PVT has out of basic or those E4's that have already deployed.

[SGT_B]

How did the Army "MAKE" you re-up for Finance?

That was all they offered me, it was take it or leave it, my choice, I wanted to be a soldier again, end of story.