Duck Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 Fvvvvvckkkk!Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dream big Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 1 hour ago, Swizzle said: Yep, that's the proposal...as PRFs were only supposed to be discriminators, not the one stop shop. New strats rules are coming/proposed too...expect new AGO and policy guidance. Any reason we only strat the top 15% on OPRs? Is the #16/100 CGOs in a pool really unworthy of being a senior leader in the AF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 Any reason we only strat the top 15% on OPRs? Is the #16/100 CGOs in a pool really unworthy of being a senior leader in the AF?Is there any reason we do anything anymore?Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NKAWTG Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 14 minutes ago, dream big said: Any reason we only strat the top 15% on OPRs? Is the #16/100 CGOs in a pool really unworthy of being a senior leader in the AF? Senior leaders can strat people any way they want to, but an outside the top 15 to 20% strat with a number is way to tell the board that he has alot of good people and would normally received a strat with the normal bell curve of people. For everyone one else, it doesn't matter if you are 16/100 or 97/100. Big blue could care less what you do as long as it has enough bodies to fill the taskings. They just won't tell you that your record no longer has O-6 potential. You're on your own to figure that part out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swizzle Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 28 minutes ago, dream big said: Any reason we only strat the top 15% on OPRs? Is the #16/100 CGOs in a pool really unworthy of being a senior leader in the AF? Strats are individuals' philosophies on a feedback form, so it's been said and observed by lack of USAF guidance...so ask those individuals...or wait until/if the AFI standardizing strats comes out and follow the Bobs' instructions blindy without question - it's just easier that way....rrrriiigght!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennynova Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 2 hours ago, dream big said: Any reason we only strat the top 15% on OPRs? Is the #16/100 CGOs in a pool really unworthy of being a senior leader in the AF? That's SR preference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ Kind Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, NKAWTG said: They just won't tell you that your record no longer has O-6 potential. You're on your own to figure that part out. So true, and this is absolutely one of the worst parts of our "system". The best CCs out there would find a way to sit down their new Lts and explain to them how the system works from the onset, but at the same time, have them leave the room with the expectation that they are to focus on being an expert in the plane and let everything else (upgrades, jobs, PME) play out as it will for the time being. Additionally, from what I have seen, "late bloomers" don't even know that is a thing until it is too late to affect any change. The difference now, though, is that those late bloomers have more options on the outside and are way less incentivized to stay and chase the carrot. I've heard we will go to one line "prfs" and let the records speak on their own all oprs will go to 5 lines and have static close out dates like eprs If this is the case, and to truly focus on job performance, any SR worth his/her salt would mandate inclusion of 942/Form 8s in the supporting documents (along with SURFs/past reports) as OPRs come up for stratification/reviewer signature. Edited May 19, 2017 by Champ Kind 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 19, 2017 Share Posted May 19, 2017 (edited) 6 hours ago, dream big said: Any reason we only strat the top 15% on OPRs? Is the #16/100 CGOs in a pool really unworthy of being a senior leader in the AF? I have worked for mostly leaders who are willing to only concentrate their efforts on that "top 15%". At some point, I am guessing they draw a line in the sand in terms of effort, time and resources they are willing to expend. So if you are not in that pool then SOL. but here is the thing not everyone develops on the same timeline. The exclusion (read lack of grooming/mentoring) of guy #26/100 is only to our detriment. Many a time over the last decade, I have seen my boss/supervisor/upper management refuse to throw a bone to the lower ranking (i.e. Lower 85%...insert what percentage works for you) Edited May 19, 2017 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennynova Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 Anyone hear any news yet?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bender Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 Anyone hear any news yet??Nope.BendySent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirkDiggler Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 Notifications are starting to trickle out, just heard from a buddy of mine that he made it one above Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennynova Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 All our guys found out this afternoon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 I know a guy who got news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcola Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 List is floating around. I've seen it, but don't have it. Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olevelo Posted May 20, 2017 Share Posted May 20, 2017 My boss (the OG) told me a couple days ago they'd notify folks today. Since I'm on leave he said he'd call, but never heard anything. So not sure if our release was delayed, or they're just refusing to tell me bad news over the phone. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bode Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Active Duty Increments for Promotion to Lieutenant Colonel March LAF, CY16B: Quota 140, Remaining 766 April LAF, CY16B: Quota 140, Remaining 626 May LAF, CY16B: Quota 140, Remaining 486 June LAF, CY16B: Quota 81, Remaining 405 July TBD Active Duty Increments for Promotion to Major March LAF, CY16C: Quota 261, Remaining 1120 April LAF, CY16C: Quota 261, Remaining 859 May LAF, CY16C: Quota 261, Remaining 598 June LAF, CY16C: Quota 150, Remaining 448 MyPers doesn't list increments before March, so I'm not sure when the increment went from 180 to 261, but beginning in June the increment will decrease to 150, at which rate the Major list will be exhausted in September and the Lt Col list (increment of 81 in June) will be exhausted in November. I've not paid close attention to board other than my own, but I've never seen a LAF list start pinning on before January. New numbers out for June. Major-Back to 261 then 114 for July and August. Give 109 left for Sept. Lt Col-140 for June, then 70 for July and August. 206 remaining after August. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I found out. I'm am in-res IDE grad, so not a big surprise. (That's not endorsement from me of the use of school in res as a discriminator...I'm just stating fact.)Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network Forums 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClearedHot Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 5 hours ago, Ram said: I found out. I'm am in-res IDE grad, so not a big surprise. (That's not endorsement from me of the use of school in res as a discriminator...I'm just stating fact.) Meanwhile....for the second year in a row Ops folks with P's and Super P's got hammered. All the talk from from the last two CSAF's about mission focus and "we need you"...again empty words. How many mixed messages can they send? Sadly, the AF deserves what it is about to get. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ratner Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I found out. I'm am in-res IDE grad, so not a big surprise. (That's not endorsement from me of the use of school in res as a discriminator...I'm just stating fact.)Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network ForumsGood for you, Ram.Sometimes the good guys winSent from my Pixel using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeHoler Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I personally know two who were passed over for O-5 and not continued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Ratner Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 I personally know two who were passed over for O-5 and not continued.I wonder if this is decision will apply to the Major board as well.I want to say no, but by what logic are they not continuing Majors? Why would that not apply to captains?Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrizzell Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Two pilots at my location; both 1APZ, neither promoted are both being involuntarily separated...Makes sense seeing as how we have a pilot shortage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panchbarnes Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 Is it possible that these people asked not to be continued and their leadership granted them that wish? At least they will be eligible for involuntary separation pay. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennynova Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 57 minutes ago, jrizzell said: Two pilots at my location; both 1APZ, neither promoted are both being involuntarily separated...Makes sense seeing as how we have a pilot shortage Very odd. If you have more information I'm curious i didn't think the AF was bootin people unless they us negative indicators of some sort.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrizzell Posted May 23, 2017 Share Posted May 23, 2017 4 minutes ago, panchbarnes said: Is it possible that these people asked not to be continued and their leadership granted them that wish? At least they will be eligible for involuntary separation pay. Neither of these guys asked for that. They were both plannning on next assignments, and assumed that continuation would be offered. These were not shitbags either, both checked all boxes and are working staff jobs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now