Mullen: No JCS enlisted advisor

[proud2bblue]

Just wanted some opinions on this one. Seems like another slap in the face to the senior enlisted from an arrogant, I don't need an enlisted mans (persons) opinion officer. Since I currently serve in a joint command, I am well aware of the poor Officer leadership the Navy suffers from. I am just disgusted by the comments from the MCPON and SGM of the Marine Corps being politically correct and supporting this poor decision! :mad:

[CrustySMSgt]

I read the article (below) also, and that was my initial thoughts too... but after reading it again, I am hoping his intent is to cut out the middleman and when he needs input, going to the Component Chiefs, or lower in the food chain. With all the bitching about how Command Chiefs are just yes men (not my opinion... but that concern has been raised here many times), this could be looked at as a positive sign that he doesn't wanted filtered opinions, he wants to reach out and get them himself. Just a thought...

BTW, welcome to the board... cool name!

Mullen: No JCS enlisted advisor

By William H. McMichael - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Oct 8, 2008 21:59:24 EDT

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has decided not to name a new senior enlisted advisor, saying he’d rather reach out on his own for input and advice from the military’s enlisted community.

The decision leaves vacant a position established by Adm. Mike Mullen’s predecessor, Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace, and filled by Army Command Sgt. Maj. William Gainey for 2½ years before his April retirement after 33 years of service.

“He’s made this decision after long and careful consideration, and consultation with the senior enlisted advisors of the four services,” said Navy Capt. John Kirby, Mullen’s spokesman. “He has decided that it would serve him best to not necessarily fill that position with an individual, but continue to reach out on a regular and concerted basis with the senior enlisted advisors of the services and the combatant commands.”

Gainey spent the final seven months of his tour advising Mullen. Kirby said Mullen’s Oct. 1 decision had nothing to do with the quality of Gainey’s service or Pace’s decision to create the job.

“They had a very good working relationship, and Adm. Mullen has nothing but respect for Sgt. Maj. Gainey, his service and the job that he did here on the Joint Staff,” Kirby said.

Mullen’s decision is not a statement on Pace’s original concept or Gainey’s performance in the job, Kirby said. “This has nothing to do with them,” he said. “This has to do with Adm. Mullen’s particular leadership style, and the goals and objectives he set as chairman.”

Kirby said Mullen took so long to decide whether to fill the job after Gainey retired — five months — because “he really wrestled with it. … He wanted to make sure that he was making it for the right reasons.”

One of Mullen’s concerns, Kirby said, was that the chairman did not want to take any of what he called “these top, hard-charging enlisted leaders” and “bring them to the Pentagon in a time of war and great uncertainty for the troops and their families if he couldn’t ensure that that position was going to be 100 percent impactful. I think he came to the conclusion that that senior enlisted talent is better placed in the field and in the fleet.”

Mullen will tap into that expertise “as often as he can, rather than have one of those talented individuals simply reside here in the Pentagon with him,” Kirby said.

The top enlisted Marine said he has no quarrel with that decision.

“The chairman knows his situation best,” said Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Carlton Kent. “If he feels the mission can be accomplished without filling that billet, I have full confidence in that decision. Admiral Mullen has made it known that he wishes to work closely with the senior enlisted of all services, so I stand ready to give my support and sound advice when called upon.”

The Navy’s top sailor said he is also comfortable with Mullen’s decision.

“Admiral Mullen has voiced a desire to establish a closer relationship” with the services’ senior enlisted advisors, said Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy Joe Campa.

“I wholeheartedly support that,” Campa said. “Our services are working more jointly than at any time in our nation’s history, and we have the responsibility to ensure our men and women are well supported through a broad spectrum of operations. Feedback from the senior enlisted leaders working in our combatant commands and our joint task forces is equally critical.”

Mullen has a habit of reaching out personally to enlisted service members. On trips to the field, he frequently makes time to meet not only with senior enlisteds of all the services but with younger troops and their families — meetings in which they are encouraged to speak candidly.

“His main job is to advise the secretary of defense and the president on issues of military matters and national security,” Kirby said. “This is a question he asks every day — how best do I give that advice? And he does believe that input from the troops and their families is vital to him being able to give that advice.”

Kirby said Mullen has spoken with the services’ senior enlisted advisors and met with them just prior to making his decision to “explain his thought process.”

“He does intend to reach out to them on a more frequent, regular basis, now that he’s made this decision,” Kirby said, adding that Mullen understands and respects the relationship between the service chiefs and their enlisted advisors and will not try to circumvent that.

[proud2bblue]

Crusty,
This just sends a bad message. If the CJCS does not need or want to fill the position of a senior enlisted advisor, what is next? Other 4-stars will take note and we could see Command Chief positiions go unfilled or brushed to the side. It is hard enough to deal with the arrogance from the 0-6/star level, if we start losing these positiions, the enlisted force will lose its voice and we are screwed. We have worked too hard to get these positiions and get the senior O's to realize they out of touch and need solid advice.

[Measure Man]

Just wanted some opinions on this one. Seems like another slap in the face to the senior enlisted from an arrogant, I don't need an enlisted mans (persons) opinion officer. Since I currently serve in a joint command, I am well aware of the poor Officer leadership the Navy suffers from. I am just disgusted by the comments from the MCPON and SGM of the Marine Corps being politically correct and supporting this poor decision! :mad:

Anybody know what he did...SGM Gainey I mean? I think he was the first and only one in this position...what did he do?

I guess I see the CJCS as a national strategic position and not sure "enlisted issues" is really his arena. He is more concerned with national level policy of how/when you use military power, not the actually running of the military. The SECDEF and President don't have enlisted advisors...

[CrustySMSgt]

Crusty,
This just sends a bad message. If the CJCS does not need or want to fill the position of a senior enlisted advisor, what is next? Other 4-stars will take note and we could see Command Chief positiions go unfilled or brushed to the side. It is hard enough to deal with the arrogance from the 0-6/star level, if we start losing these positiions, the enlisted force will lose its voice and we are screwed. We have worked too hard to get these positiions and get the senior O's to realize they out of touch and need solid advice.

The position was only created less than 3 years ago, so it is not like it is a long standing postion being cast aside. I've chatted with a couple numbered AF Command Chiefs, and they both hated the job... you've got no people, you have to work everything through the Wing Command Chiefs, and you are insulated from what is really going on because everywhere you go, you are treated like a DV. I can only imagine how the SEA felt at that level, having to work through the service Chiefs, the best of the best themselves.

I'm all for having enlisted leaders in key positions, but when they are just a figurehead and have no operational function, and probably a very slight management influence, are we really gaining anything.

And refering back to my comment on Command Chiefs in general... the general consensus seems to be that they are out of touch, so do you really think that anyone appointed to the JCS SEA position has recently "been in touch" with the working man? By the time they get there they've been through several levels of HQ positions, so I don't think that angle is enough to justify the position.

I do have his coin... I guess it is a collectors item now... the first and only JCS SEA coin.

[CrustySMSgt]

Anybody know what he did...SGM Gainey I mean? I think he was the first and only one in this position...what did he do?

I guess I see the CJCS as a national strategic position and not sure "enlisted issues" is really his arena. He is more concerned with national level policy of how/when you use military power, not the actually running of the military. The SECDEF and President don't have enlisted advisors...

I'd be interested to hear HIS thoughts on the decision... I gotta think the CJCS solicited his opinion on the matter.

[Measure Man]

The position was only created less than 3 years ago, so it is not like it is a long standing postion being cast aside. I've chatted with a couple numbered AF Command Chiefs, and they both hated the job... you've got no people, you have to work everything through the Wing Command Chiefs, and you are insulated from what is really going on because everywhere you go, you are treated like a DV. I can only imagine how the SEA felt at that level, having to work through the service Chiefs, the best of the best themselves.

I'm all for having enlisted leaders in key positions, but when they are just a figurehead and have no operational function, and probably a very slight management influence, are we really gaining anything.

I do have his coin... I guess it is a collectors item now... the first and only JCS SEA coin.


Yes...the NAF CCMs are another one I don't get...they don't have large enlisted populations...they don't own enlisted QoL...dorms, FTACs, Prof Dev, etc. NAF are operational....they don't so much deal in "enlisted issues"...what does the CCM do? What is he accountable for? When you are done as a NAF CCM, what do you look back on and say..."I did this"...?

[proud2bblue]

I'd be interested to hear HIS thoughts on the decision... I gotta think the CJCS solicited his opinion on the matter.

I agree with most of what you said, but these positions are what the person in them makes of them. I know that they are political type positions, but I have seen some very engaged NAF/MAJOM CCM's. Just my opinion, but these positions should be treated like DV's and Wg Kings and GO's should sit down and listen to them. It grows respect for the rank and the position. Most Chiefs at that level want to be there and agreed to take the job. The best 0-6's/stars I have had the pleasure of working for understood the Chiefs role and listened and included them in almost every decision they made. The ones that don't listen are usually well known and have the same E-9 following them around.

By the way, great discussion/points!

[CrustySMSgt]

I agree with most of what you said, but these positions are what the person in them makes of them. I know that they are political type positions, but I have seen some very engaged NAF/MAJOM CCM's. Just my opinion, but these positions should be treated like DV's and Wg Kings and GO's should sit down and listen to them. It grows respect for the rank and the position. Most Chiefs at that level want to be there and agreed to take the job. The best 0-6's/stars I have had the pleasure of working for understood the Chiefs role and listened and included them in almost every decision they made. The ones that don't listen are usually well known and have the same E-9 following them around.

By the way, great discussion/points!

I didn't mean being treated like a DV was a bad thing... but it does insulate you from what is really going on, which makes it very difficult to stay in touch.

There's a difference between MAJCOM & NAF positions... at a MAJCOM you have OPCON of forces... most people just see the NAF as an extra layer of leadership to get through.

NIce chatting with you also... you'll find some great folks on this board... a wide variety of opinions and backgrounds, which makes for some interesting debate.

[Measure Man]

I agree with most of what you said, but these positions are what the person in them makes of them. I know that they are political type positions, but I have seen some very engaged NAF/MAJOM CCM's.

very engaged in what?

I"m not knocking the individuals...most I've seen are awesome people...I just honestly do not know what they do. What are they accountable for? What do they "own"?

Just my opinion, but these positions should be treated like DV's and Wg Kings and GO's should sit down and listen to them. It grows respect for the rank and the position. Most Chiefs at that level want to be there and agreed to take the job. The best 0-6's/stars I have had the pleasure of working for understood the Chiefs role and listened and included them in almost every decision they made. The ones that don't listen are usually well known and have the same E-9 following them around.

By the way, great discussion/points!

I think wing CCMs, definitely...and MAJCOM too...I just don't get the role of the NAF CCM.

[Measure Man]

I didn't mean being treated like a DV was a bad thing... but it does insulate you from what is really going on, which makes it very difficult to stay in touch.

There's a difference between MAJCOM & NAF positions... at a MAJCOM you have OPCON of forces... most people just see the NAF as an extra layer of leadership to get through.

I think it is ADCON you are looking for. NAF have OPCON...but that isn't what a CCM does...and CCM is not involved in operations...they are involved in ADCON moreso. A CCM probably does not weigh in with an enlisted perspective on the employment of air power during an Operation...

[CrustySMSgt]

I think it is ADCON you are looking for. NAF have OPCON...but that isn't what a CCM does...and CCM is not involved in operations...they are involved in ADCON moreso. A CCM probably does not weigh in with an enlisted perspective on the employment of air power during an Operation...

Got me there, my "con" dyslexia kicked in. :(

[Pueblo]

This is a bad move strictly from an image standpoint. However, how in touch is a senior enlisted person at that level? Let's face it, senior enlisted advisors at the MAJCOM level and above are simply tokens.

[Gunner007]

Perhaps its the first step in cutting out bureaucratic nonsense in the military? If we can cut more levels along the way that would be fine so long as they are O & E alike! I think we honestly have to many staff personnel as it is. Less office workers and more line dogs is the right direction to go. I doubt the SNCO in this position really stood his ground on important issues anyway. most of the time the assistants, aides, and advisors tow the company line and resist feather ruffling, so cutting one wont make much difference.

[CommunityEditor]

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has decided not to name a new senior enlisted adviser, saying he’d rather reach out on his own for input and advice from the military’s enlisted community.

The decision leaves vacant a position established by Adm. Mike Mullen’s predecessor, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, and filled by Army Command Sgt. Maj. William Gainey for 2½ years before his April retirement after 33 years of service.

“He’s made this decision after long and careful consideration, and consultation with the senior enlisted advisers of the four services,” said Navy Capt. John Kirby, Mullen’s spokesman. “He has decided that it would serve him best to not necessarily fill that position with an individual, but continue to reach out on a regular and concerted basis with the senior enlisted advisers of the services and the combatant commands.”

Gainey spent the final seven months of his tour advising Mullen. Kirby said Mullen’s Oct. 1 decision had nothing to do with the quality of Gainey’s service or Pace’s decision to create the job.

“They had a very good working relationship, and Adm. Mullen has nothing but respect for Sgt. Maj. Gainey, his service and the job that he did here on the Joint Staff,” Kirby said.

Mullen’s decision is not a statement on Pace’s original concept or Gainey’s performance in the job, Kirby said. “This has nothing to do with them,” he said. “This has to do with Adm. Mullen’s particular leadership style, and the goals and objectives he set as chairman.”

Kirby said Mullen took so long to decide whether to fill the job after Gainey retired — five months — because “he really wrestled with it. … He wanted to make sure that he was making it for the right reasons.”

One of Mullen’s concerns, Kirby said, was that the chairman did not want to take any of what he called “these top, hard-charging enlisted leaders” and “bring them to the Pentagon in a time of war and great uncertainty for the troops and their families if he couldn’t ensure that that position was going to be 100 percent impactful. I think he came to the conclusion that that senior enlisted talent is better placed in the field and in the fleet.”

Mullen will tap into that expertise “as often as he can, rather than have one of those talented individuals simply reside here in the Pentagon with him,” Kirby said.

The top enlisted Marine said he has no quarrel with that decision.

“The chairman knows his situation best,” said Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps Carlton Kent. “If he feels the mission can be accomplished without filling that billet, I have full confidence in that decision. Admiral Mullen has made it known that he wishes to work closely with the senior enlisted of all services, so I stand ready to give my support and sound advice when called upon.”

The Navy’s top sailor said he is also comfortable with Mullen’s decision.

“Admiral Mullen has voiced a desire to establish a closer relationship” with the services’ senior enlisted advisers, said Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy Joe Campa.

“I wholeheartedly support that,” Campa said. “Our services are working more jointly than at any time in our nation’s history, and we have the responsibility to ensure our men and women are well supported through a broad spectrum of operations. Feedback from the senior enlisted leaders working in our combatant commands and our joint task forces is equally critical.”

Mullen has a habit of reaching out personally to enlisted service members. On trips to the field, he frequently makes time to meet not only with senior enlisteds of all the services but with younger troops and their families — meetings in which they are encouraged to speak candidly.

“His main job is to advise the secretary of defense and the president on issues of military matters and national security,” Kirby said. “This is a question he asks every day — how best do I give that advice? And he does believe that input from the troops and their families is vital to him being able to give that advice.”

Kirby said Mullen has spoken with the services’ senior enlisted advisers and met with them just prior to making his decision to “explain his thought process.”

“He does intend to reach out to them on a more frequent, regular basis, now that he’s made this decision,” Kirby said, adding that Mullen understands and respects the relationship between the service chiefs and their enlisted advisers and will not try to circumvent that.


Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2008/10/military_enlistedadviser_mullen_100808w/

[AIRFORCEAGGIE]

This is a bad move strictly from an image standpoint. However, how in touch is a senior enlisted person at that level? Let's face it, senior enlisted advisors at the MAJCOM level and above are simply tokens.


It depends on the individual. When I was stationed at the Pentagon, the CMsgt for the Pentagon Comm Agency made a point of inspecting the enlisted barracks at Fort Myer to make sure the quality of life was good for his personnel. In addition, he regularly took out two to three junior enlisted for lunch every week to have an out of office discussion on general issues. All in all, he was one of the sharpest individuals that I ever met. In addition to his duties as the senior enlisted advisor, he had time to also earn a doctorate and was on the board of two local banks and credit unions. In addition to being a mentor to the junior enlisted, he was also a mentor to the junior officers. I count myself lucky to have served with him.

[Venus]

Well at least this might in the long run stop the blatant self absorbed careerism of E-9's trying to be E-10's.:)

[Unregistered]

Wow, what a great opportunity to silence any enlisted point of view. I am not surprised the position went away...after years of working at Bolling and the Pentagon, I realized how unimportant the enlisted viewpoint was.

[Unregistered]

Navy culture...

[VFFSSGT]

We complained senior enlisted were nothing more than yes men...you can't complain when they take them out of the picture. I don't know if this is a result of the 'yes men' article or not but it did make front page a few issues back. There are also the many that made the point that senior enlisted are nothing more than morale police too.... Be careful what you ask for.

In my experience, I have come across more brainless (aka 'yes men') senior enlisted than senior officers. Every time I have brought issues to senior enlisted they were scared to take it to the officers, God forbid they tell an officer there is a problem... :rolleyes: I have been in situations where I was able to deal with senior officers directly (rotating through the much dreaded staff positions) and the senior officers are more than willing to assist and get things done and done right - THEY JUST HAVE TO BE TOLD; don’t be scared to do your job (advice intended for senior enlisted). If this General is sincere about reaching out on his own, which I have no reason to believe otherwise, I believe this will be beneficial to the services. We can only hope the Air Force follows suit. I believe we would be much better off without so many 'yes men' (aka Seniors and Chiefs and junior officers) running around.

Note: Seniors and Chiefs does not refer to all of them; it is a general statement and you know who you are...

[reklawj9]

Doesn't matter a hell of alot...like they ever pay any thing more than lip service to enlisted conserns any way...at least he wont be a hypocrite....

[thefarmergeneral com]

Strangely, I agree with this move. Recently, we've seen a move from CMCs representing the concerns of us lower pukes to them becoming the reason for us lower pukes to not voice those concerns.

[Unregistered]

You know, I really admire and have the utmost respect for the Senior Leaders I have worked with over the years. They earned my respect. They worked within the rank and file and they always llistened and were genuinelly concerned for the welfare of our enlisted and their families. Only once in a while there comes along somone who wants do eveything themselves and when you get someone like that they will need some coaching and mentoring to help them get back on track. It sure seems some coaching is due here.
Our enlisted deseve nothing but the best Senior Advisor at the top to advise the JCS on enlisted matters of concern.

[reklawj9]

Sorry pal don't agree,
when was the last time any E-9 had to dig the change out of the sofa to buy milk?
We have a saying out here, there are Chiefs, and then there are E-3 plus 6's.......(these are the folk who kiss commissioned backside and look only to enhance their own resumes)

[Unregistered]

NCOs have been giving up more and more for years. We get the occasional "good dog" stroking during a change of command. But we sure are reminded of our "place"! Maybe the Chairman could take a trip to Houston Texas and find out WHY there are so many suicides! Is there an NCO driving this chain of events? Doubt it. How about the Officers who come into recruiting and think they know everything about it and break rules left and right and nothing happens. A combat war vet gets assigned to recruiting and suddenly he is useless. Unprofessional. Doesn't understand Army Values. Give me a break. We need a strong enlisted advisor as much as the president needs his advisors. Since when did this become a one-man-show? The NCOs have allowed Officers, yes I said allowed, Officers to do what they want, when they want. The NCOs have become too scared of a poor NCOER. Speak up! It may not be a popular statement but, if it is truth, speak up. Tell that CPT or COL or even a General, Sir "you are wrong". Here’s a clue. A college degree and a trip to the war college does not built a GOD, just an inflated ego. And yes, I am retired. Made E-8 and loved my service to my country. And you can bet I did speak up, even when it wasn’t popular! I just can't stand the double standards and the Officers who think they are beyond reproach.

[cobra6]

NCOs have been giving up more and more for years. We get the occasional "good dog" stroking during a change of command. But we sure are reminded of our "place"! Maybe the Chairman could take a trip to Houston Texas and find out WHY there are so many suicides! Is there an NCO driving this chain of events? Doubt it. How about the Officers who come into recruiting and think they know everything about it and break rules left and right and nothing happens. A combat war vet gets assigned to recruiting and suddenly he is useless. Unprofessional. Doesn't understand Army Values. Give me a break. We need a strong enlisted advisor as much as the president needs his advisors. Since when did this become a one-man-show? The NCOs have allowed Officers, yes I said allowed, Officers to do what they want, when they want. The NCOs have become too scared of a poor NCOER. Speak up! It may not be a popular statement but, if it is truth, speak up. Tell that CPT or COL or even a General, Sir "you are wrong". Here’s a clue. A college degree and a trip to the war college does not built a GOD, just an inflated ego. And yes, I am retired. Made E-8 and loved my service to my country. And you can bet I did speak up, even when it wasn’t popular! I just can't stand the double standards and the Officers who think they are beyond reproach.

I can uderstand your position. I became an Officer because I was tired of working my tail off and having a new LT come in and screw up my platoon. I also value an NCO who has the Candor to speak up when his Officers are wrong. That said, I have also seen NCO's who were an embarassment to the NCO Corps....look at the number of junior soldiers who do not know how to wear a uniform correclty or act correclty...for example standing at the position of parade rest when an NCO addresses them. Yet, if I say something I get an NCO reponse of "Sir this is NCO business". If you are going to be so critical of the Officer Corps then be just as critical of the NCO Corps. Remember, the only one beyond reproach is the one who truly sets the standards....and no I am not perfect, but I do strive to give my NCOs the utmost latitude to perform their duties and responsibilities.

[PRSTeel]

Might as well add the "E" to the end of the word "Non" Commissioned Officer to spell NONE COMMISSIONED OFFICER! Ask yourself why and you will find out that we let it happen by not doing our best to keep officers away from what we do best LEADING!! Let them get paid to plan ops and leave it to us to make it happen!! Phasing us out people!! There has been writing on the wall for years now. Sorry I didn't stand beside and watch as another enlisted position was taken away from I would hope a deserving Sr. NCO, but they sure didn't speak up for the rest of the Sr. NCO's did they? What if we went to the 1SG and said, " I got the Platoon Top, I don't need the Platoon leaders advise"? You think the Company Comander would stand by and say, "You know your right SFC, You would be better running the Platoon without him or her"? Wake up!! Your dreaming:) Non-commissioned officer, petty officer! Great lables for what we have begun to act like by not speaking up!! Guess the officers knew what they were doing back in the day when they gave us them names huh???

Makes me SICK!!

[Unregistered]

This decision is interesting, especially since the advisor position is already congressionally approved, with special pay, staff, etc. The position is a conduit to balance the service enlisted perspectives with those of the combatant commands.

[Unregistered]

This decision is interesting, especially since the advisor position is already congressionally approved, with special pay, staff, etc. The position is a conduit to balance the service enlisted perspectives with those of the combatant commands.

true-It is funny that there is a fully funded billet but he chooses not to fill it. My take on it is that if he wants the enlisted communities advice, he would go straight to the service's top E9's to get it. With his leadership style though, having an E9 might be a hinderance to his objectives.

[Bob999]

As a former NCO (eight years enlisted time), I believe that he is making a mistake. Even if he does reach out and obtain input and feedback from enlisted personnel, the impression will still exist that he does not respect and care about the enlisted personnel in the military.

E. Robert Clifton
Lieutenant Colonel, AUS (Ret)

[Unregistered]

Having served with CSM Gainey during OIF-II, I know he was a man of trure character and leadership. Every day he was out in the field with his soldiers ensuring that they were taken care of. Our nation is lucky to have an NCO of his caliber to be the 1st SEA to the Chairman. I think Admiral Mullen will quickly find out the the position is needed and required. As a Sr. NCO myself, CSM Gainey's leadership will always be an example I will try to follow. Good job CSM!

[Unregistered]

Might as well do away with CSM. The only job they do is carry some officers brief case and open doors for him. Very much over paid to do that. Have you seen the pay differences between a 1SG who actually has a job and work to do and the pay for a CSM who does nothing but work on his connections for a job after service. My last 5 years I saw nothing from a CSM. Certainly did not care about the working conditions of the troops. Afraid to say anything because he might get bounced from his gravey train or get a bad NCOER. If a JCS whats to know anything about enlisted issues, he should go see a 1SG or MSG who works in real life and works with enlisted troops everyday.














g

[Unregistered]

Not a good precedent to set or position to take. He will be too busy to truly reach out and touch the NCO Corps. His background is officer and that is where his thinking will be.

It is truly said that he thinks he can be all and do all. Hopefully it won't take too long for him to figure it out.

As for the E-9's that support the move in the press, they are just kissing the ring of their boss. I think if they were true to themselves and their troops they would speak what they know in their hearts rather than lip service.

[CrustySMSgt]

Afraid to say anything because he might get bounced from his gravey train or get a bad NCOER.

uh... he's already an E-9... WTF would a bad NCOER do to him, he's not getting promoted again. :confused:

[CrustySMSgt]

Not a good precedent to set or position to take. He will be too busy to truly reach out and touch the NCO Corps. His background is officer and that is where his thinking will be.

It is truly said that he thinks he can be all and do all. Hopefully it won't take too long for him to figure it out.

As for the E-9's that support the move in the press, they are just kissing the ring of their boss. I think if they were true to themselves and their troops they would speak what they know in their hearts rather than lip service.

Presedence set? The job has only been in place for 2.5 years... not like it was some long standing tradition...

My bet is Gainey told him straight up it was a waste of time and recommended he not fill the billet.

[Your_Name_Here]

For those who are scared about the idea of that billet not getting filled--cheer up, it's not like the position was done away with altogether. Who knows--maybe the next time, should we get a CJCS who can't be bothered to get that Enlisted feedback, he can always appoint that SEA and let him/her do that legwork.
Until then, we should be glad that the Admiral essentially took out one layer/filter that might have only served to filter or water down input from the field.

I met him once when he was still CNO. You know how you can catch a vibe from someone and can tell that they are either going through the motions or worse--you wouldn't buy a used car from him? Not ADM Mullen; you can't fake the genuine interest he displayed.
Contrast the time I met then-SECDEF from the Clinton yrs.--I instantly felt like I wanted to punch him AND his aide. Yes, the vibe was like that. lol

[CrustySMSgt]

I met him once when he was still CNO. You know how you can catch a vibe from someone and can tell that they are either going through the motions or worse--you wouldn't buy a used car from him? Not ADM Mullen; you can't fake the genuine interest he displayed.


I know what you mean. I met Bush Sr in Pakistan, and he seemed like such a genuine guy, just wanting to hang out and talk to us, while his aides were trying to drag him away... lol

[Unregistered]

Presedence set? The job has only been in place for 2.5 years... not like it was some long standing tradition...

My bet is Gainey told him straight up it was a waste of time and recommended he not fill the billet.

I worked for SgtMaj Gainey and Gen Pace and I can assure you that neither would say that its a wasted billet. SgtMaj Gainey took as many trips around the services as Gen Pace. Gen. Pace also spent alot of time with Gainey and spoke of his candor and willingness to speak his mind. Every commander has an enlisted adviser, so why shouldn't the most important commander?

[AIRFORCEAGGIE]

I worked for SgtMaj Gainey and Gen Pace and I can assure you that neither would say that its a wasted billet. SgtMaj Gainey took as many trips around the services as Gen Pace. Gen. Pace also spent alot of time with Gainey and spoke of his candor and willingness to speak his mind. Every commander has an enlisted adviser, so why shouldn't the most important commander?

Just to be a devil's advocate, wouldn't the JCS's enlisted advisor just be redundant in position? The needs of each service is unique and I find it hard to believe that anyone enlisted person can know and effectively advise on the enlisted affairs for all four services. Wouldn't it be better to have the CJCS go directly to the senior enlisted advisors for each branch?

[THELADYKT]

Interesting observation....but couldn't the same be said for the CJCS too.

[AIRFORCEAGGIE]

Interesting observation....but couldn't the same be said for the CJCS too.

No, because it is a different role. The CJCS is in the role of providing both leadership of the military in addition to his advisory role to the President on military role. The enlisted advisor is in the advisory role and as such maybe redundant to the service's senior enlisted advisors.

[Unregistered]

No, because it is a different role. The CJCS is in the role of providing both leadership of the military in addition to his advisory role to the President on military role. The enlisted advisor is in the advisory role and as such maybe redundant to the service's senior enlisted advisors.


I remember seeing the movie "stripes" for the first time recently and how John Laroquettes character (the company commander) was just some college brat with a commision after glory and power to inflate his self serving ego, and the enlisted men under him having alot more knowledge and ability and how it is that this is a reality that is also realized in film. I am not trying to take anything away from the officer corp there are some damn good officers out there but they need their NCO's because that is a vital link between the officers and enlisted men as officers are encouraged not to be that close to their juniors. Being a former enlisted man I see the need for a senior enlisted advisor at all levels of command. Mullen has no idea how this is going to affect enlisted personel, and thier opinions of him. I hope he sees that this is a mistake and ends up appointing a SEAC.

[THELADYKT]

No, because it is a different role. The CJCS is in the role of providing both leadership of the military in addition to his advisory role to the President on military role. The enlisted advisor is in the advisory role and as such maybe redundant to the service's senior enlisted advisors.

My point was more of the nature the the CJCS is of one service just as the Enlisted Advisor is. Are they really going to be able to talk about the other services as well as their own. I worked in a joing command for a 2 star admiral. And he was completly clueless on how alot of stuff of the other 4 services worked. and it wasn't just becuase he was Navy. The AF guy before him was similar.

But I suppose they try to pick those with some joint experience....just dont know how well that really works though.

[Shrike]

I remember seeing the movie "stripes" for the first time recently and how John Laroquettes character (the company commander) was just some college brat with a commision after glory and power to inflate his self serving ego, and the enlisted men under him having alot more knowledge and ability and how it is that this is a reality that is also realized in film. I am not trying to take anything away from the officer corp there are some damn good officers out there but they need their NCO's because that is a vital link between the officers and enlisted men as officers are encouraged not to be that close to their juniors. Being a former enlisted man I see the need for a senior enlisted advisor at all levels of command. Mullen has no idea how this is going to affect enlisted personel, and thier opinions of him. I hope he sees that this is a mistake and ends up appointing a SEAC.

Seeing that the position had only been around for 2.5 years, and the CJCS position has been around for almost 60 years, I think Adm Mullen has quite a good idea how this will affect enlisted personnel - very little.

Each service has their own SEA that Adm Mullen can reach out and touch when he needs to check on the pulse of the enlisted force.

[Unregistered]

Being a former enlisted man I see the need for a senior enlisted advisor at all levels of command. Mullen has no idea how this is going to affect enlisted personel, and thier opinions of him. I hope he sees that this is a mistake and ends up appointing a SEAC.

Umm..he has senior enlisted advisors. 4 of them in fact.

More likely he saw the creation of the position in the first place as a mistake. Can someone tell me one thing Gainey said or did while serving as SEAC?

No? I didn't think so.

It was ceremonial, and that's it. You guys think ADM Mullen didn't think this through, or solicit input from the services? Think again. You don't get to be CJCS by acting on a whim.

[Unregistered]

I have seen CSM Gainey speak on 2 occasions, and he had a great ability to make all enlisted personnel feel as if they were vital to the overal mission. I remember in one of his speeches him saying look at your uniforms and cover up you branch designation, what is left US. Just those simple words and many others that he has said made us "little" enlisted men feel as we played an important role. I understand that it is tough to fill his shoes "boots", but Mullen needs that SEAC. The other SEA's are just affraid to stand up to him and just stay quiet for fear of reprisal. I do not feel that Mullen thought this out all that much, at least not as much as he should have. Why give us this voice in the pentagon just to take it away. These days Mullen is a VERY busy man, there is no way he can travel all over the many commands and see how the enlisted forces are doing. In this soldiers opinion the Admiral has turned his back on us and from the few other enlisted men and women I have spoken with on this subject they seem to reflect my opinion. The enlisted men and women compose the majority of the armed forces, so why should we not have a man in the pentagon representing us.

[Unregistered]

The other SEA's are just affraid to stand up to him and just stay quiet for fear of reprisal.

You obviously don't know Sgt. Maj. Kent or MCPON Campa.

[Unregistered]

I do not personally know sergeant major Kent or Master chief Campa, but they are whom I was reffering to when I said that the SEA's don't stand up to Mullen, they are the ones that said it is fine with them that Gainey get no replacement, I am not aware of Sergeant major Preston or Chief master sergeant Mckinley perceptions of this but it seems that there are alot of officers on this blog and not too many enlisted men speaking up, as always. I realise that the military is not a democracy but there should be equal representation at all levels and there is nothing that can be said that will take the bad taste out of my mouth and that of many other sergeants and petty officers out there.

[Unregistered]

The service SEAs advise the service chiefs. The SEAC position is to strengthen the team of--and speak to the Chairman as one voice for enlisted issues related to--the combatant commands, services, and Joint Staff.

https://www.bliss.army.mil/usasma/publications/2006/06JAN_gainey.pdf

[Unregistered]

The service SEAs advise the service chiefs. The SEAC position is to strengthen the team of--and speak to the Chairman as one voice for enlisted issues related to--the combatant commands, services, and Joint Staff.

https://www.bliss.army.mil/usasma/publications/2006/06JAN_gainey.pdf

Also, services organize, train, and equip, and combatant commands employ forces. So even if the Chairman was able to get one consensus about the enlisted pulse from the four service senior enlisted advisors, he would still be missing the other "half" of the picture from the joint commands and how they need to use the forces presented to them. These are politics going back to the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986. The services wouldn't object to not having a SEAC because it elevates their positions and gives them more of a voice in joint matters.

[AIRFORCEAGGIE]

I remember seeing the movie "stripes" for the first time recently and how John Laroquettes character (the company commander) was just some college brat with a commision after glory and power to inflate his self serving ego, and the enlisted men under him having alot more knowledge and ability and how it is that this is a reality that is also realized in film. I am not trying to take anything away from the officer corp there are some damn good officers out there but they need their NCO's because that is a vital link between the officers and enlisted men as officers are encouraged not to be that close to their juniors. Being a former enlisted man I see the need for a senior enlisted advisor at all levels of command. Mullen has no idea how this is going to affect enlisted personel, and thier opinions of him. I hope he sees that this is a mistake and ends up appointing a SEAC.


However, how is this role not redundant?

[Unregistered]

I wish there would be more enlisted men voicing their opinion here. Only an officer would consider this role as redundant as does the good admiral Mullen, I used to hold this man in such high regard. It is just more politics in the military. As this is a new position, they were still ironing out the wrinkles, CSM Gainey was a hell of a good soldier and he had a way with words that made the enlisted forces all feel as they mattered even the coasties (coast gaurdsmen). The point is why give us a voice in the pentagon just to take it away latter, this is the equivalent of giving a group of people the right to vote just to take it away the next election cycle. It was a sad day for enlisted men everywhere when Mullen decided to take our voice away, citing many BS reasons such as not wanting to take a hard hitting top hat from the field. Give us our voice back Admiral Mullen you need an E-9 by your side.

[Unregistered]

Any field grade officer (especially someone in Mullen's position) that thinks they will get candid and open response from enlisted members during local visits is delusional. We all know that these members that get the opportunity to meet this kind of visitor is always hand picked. They are always briefed before hand.

Additionally, Soldiers that have issues know that if they raise any issues that the command is either unaware of or chooses to ignore, the soldier will quietly suffer the consequences later. That is the reason why we have senior enlisted advisers in the first place. They SEA has the ability to root out what is really happening and give that issue a voice without the whistle blower suffering retaliation.

It is, as was mentioned in earlier posts, a way to silence enlisted members. Whether intentional or just incompetent ignorance it is a travesty.

[Your_Name_Here]

I remember seeing the movie "stripes" for the first time recently and how John Laroquettes character (the company commander) was just some college brat with a commision after glory and power to inflate his self serving ego, and the enlisted men under him having alot more knowledge and ability and how it is that this is a reality that is also realized in film. I am not trying to take anything away from the officer corp there are some damn good officers out there but they need their NCO's because that is a vital link between the officers and enlisted men as officers are encouraged not to be that close to their juniors. Being a former enlisted man I see the need for a senior enlisted advisor at all levels of command. Mullen has no idea how this is going to affect enlisted personel, and thier opinions of him. I hope he sees that this is a mistake and ends up appointing a SEAC.

Um, that was a movie. A good one, to be sure, but still a movie. No officer, even our worst, would be stupid enough to show this level of naked incompetence.

While I do agree that advice from senior enlisted has a vital part, why restrict the CJCS to just one SEA, when he actually has FIVE (counting Coast Guard)--EACH having the appropriate Big Picture to communicate? That really IS too much info to distill into a form that ONE voice can impart.