Jump to content

Promotion and PRF Information


Guest e3racing

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, panchbarnes said:

Am I the only person that is saddened by the fact that social media and public shaming are pretty much the only ways to get the 4-stars to address toxic AF management?

Yeah the IG system is broken and you can't trust anyone to do the right thing anymore. 

What a shit show.

This comment is better reserved for What's wrong with the AF thread.

The IG system does seem to be way broken. Way too much good ole boy network and not enough impartial investigations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only person that is saddened by the fact that social media and public shaming are pretty much the only ways to get the 4-stars to address toxic AF management?
Yeah the IG system is broken and you can't trust anyone to do the right thing anymore. 
What a shit show.
This comment is better reserved for What's wrong with the AF thread.
If we can't find enough good leaders to run the wings and squadrons, how exactly will we find IGs who can recognize bad leadership and generals who will stop it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only IG that's worth a shit is SAF/IG.  If IG manpower at the Wing and MAJCOM level were all consolidated to SAF/IG, thus making SAF/IG the only IG that had the power to investigate, Commanders at all levels would collectively shit their pants when there was an allegation filed.  They wouldn't have control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, xaarman said:

Allow me to play devils advocate -

There is no rule about being a shitty commander.... the order is both legal and internationally ethical. No Fraud Waste and Abuse is at stake (not counting your time.) What would an IG do with this?

Actually there is a rule about it, it’s Article 92 (3) Dereliction of Duty.  You’re either willfully or negligently not performing the duty.  Duty can be imposed by a regulation, treaty, statue, lawful order, custom of the service, standard operating procedure, etc.  I can then have other Wing Commanders testify that they aren’t having their wings create PRF’s due to the SECAF and CSAF guidance.  By doing so I’m proving that he had knowledge of the duty by other people holding similar positions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually there is a rule about it, it’s Article 92 (3) Dereliction of Duty.  You’re either willfully or negligently not performing the duty.  Duty can be imposed by a regulation, treaty, statue, lawful order, custom of the service, standard operating procedure, etc.  I can then have other Wing Commanders testify that they aren’t having their wings create PRF’s due to the SECAF and CSAF guidance.  By doing so I’m proving that he had knowledge of the duty by other people holding similar positions.

Seeing as he’s the Wing/CC and will need to determine who to nominate for IDE, who’s to say he’s not doing this to evaluate their records and select the best candidates? Pretty sure that argument would easily hold up against your Dereliction of Duty charges.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:


Seeing as he’s the Wing/CC and will need to determine who to nominate for IDE, who’s to say he’s not doing this to evaluate their records and select the best candidates? Pretty sure that argument would easily hold up against your Dereliction of Duty charges.

Then he would have the burden to show that he’s solely doing it for IDE and not promotion potential.  To counter that I’d just find a bunch of Wing Commander’s who would testify for me (the government) saying they are using different criteria to select for promotion, and possibly IDE, to make show that he might have an different motive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:


Seeing as he’s the Wing/CC and will need to determine who to nominate for IDE, who’s to say he’s not doing this to evaluate their records and select the best candidates? Pretty sure that argument would easily hold up against your Dereliction of Duty charges.

Pure speculation and, respectfully, a bad example.  There are other ways to nominate for IDE that don't require the churn of writing a PRF.  Let's also not forget that one has to volunteer for IDE nomination.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pure speculation and, respectfully, a bad example.  There are other ways to nominate for IDE that don't require the churn of writing a PRF.  Let's also not forget that one has to volunteer for IDE nomination.  

I’m not defending his actions in the least. Just saying there’s about a 0% chance he gets brought up on charges for or convicted for dereliction of duty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xaarman said:

Allow me to play devils advocate -

There is no rule about being a shitty commander.... the order is both legal and internationally ethical. No Fraud Waste and Abuse is at stake (not counting your time.) What would an IG do with this?

My reference to IG was a general statement and not necessarily applicable to the Dyess situation (maybe/maybe not).  It was just depressing reading about this one and the Langley AMXS situation over the weekend.  When you include previously known incidents of AF toxic managers and IG investigation, there is a trend of real changes coming after the stories became viral via social media platforms.

For the amount of time and money the AF pours into leadership development (PME, Phoenix programs, and etc.), social media/public shaming is the only way to get AF's attention.  Now you see people going to social media (for small/big issues) as the first option because of lack of trust.  I suppose this is just the era we live in, but totally not what I had envisioned when I took that first oath.

I hope this clears up my post up a bit, sorry for the confusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, ihtfp06 said:

I’m not defending his actions in the least. Just saying there’s about a 0% chance he gets brought up on charges for or convicted for dereliction of duty.

I would say he has a good chance of not having no charges levied against him either, but a 0% chance is not true.  That totally depends on how far a senior Convening Authority wants to go with a potential investigation.  Also JAG’s are really good at making questionable conduct look like unsavory misconduct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, xaarman said:

What would an IG do with this?

The Wing/IG?  Nothing: they work for him, although they can (and should) funnel SA building data to him (*cough QoL/Airmen’s time)

The MAJCOM IG on the other hand, could give him some serious headaches at the next capstone.  

Edited by BFM this
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/24/2017 at 3:00 PM, mcbush said:

The first thing I always think of from his Sq/CC days was how much he liked to berate people for walking on his grass. There's about a two foot wide berm between the parking lot and the road in front of the squadron that everybody always walks over because it's a much more direct route than going all the way down to the sidewalk. His office on the second floor overlooked this whole scene perfectly, and he would allegedly spend his days peering down into the parking lot looking for violators. Over the years, many well-meaning dudes and dudettes were summoned into his office and dressed down at attention, most of whom were brand new LTs on their first day in the squadron who didn't recognize the importance of walking around said grass. It always rubbed me the wrong way that their first ten minutes in the "real Air Force," having finally made it through UPT and everything else, was spent getting bitched out by that guy. What a way to welcome somebody to the squadron...

 

I recall talking to a second assignment guy from hickam who said he got ripped his first day walking in the sq.. I always felt bad for him, moving from the best C17 base to that dude's squadron.

After that, I always made a point to walk across their grass anytime I was in the vicinity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for the masses. I was just told that my WG/CC cannot give me a DNP because I have no negative quality indicators. This was told to the Wing Exec by some civilian chick at AETC HQ who deals with promotions. Is it true that our own O-6 Wing Commanders are neutered to the point that they can’t decide for themselves which box to check on a PRF unless a civilian at higher HQ gives them the green light or is this a load of $hit?

Thanks bros.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Duck said:

Question for the masses. I was just told that my WG/CC cannot give me a DNP because I have no negative quality indicators. This was told to the Wing Exec by some civilian chick at AETC HQ who deals with promotions. Is it true that our own O-6 Wing Commanders are neutered to the point that they can’t decide for themselves which box to check on a PRF unless a civilian at higher HQ gives them the green light or is this a load of $hit?

Thanks bros.

I think the Air Force may have checkmated you there Duck.  You fall into the category of should be promoted but don't want to be.  I doubt the Wg/CC is handicapped by AFPC, but the direction might be that a DNP  needs to be backed up by the record.  

The way the system should work now is the Sq/CC documents the performance of the substandard O-3, recommends a DNP to the senior rater, and they need to make the call and send the DNP to the board.  Hard to do now since the "continue to challenge" push lines won't be enough to deny promotion like years past. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question for the masses. I was just told that my WG/CC cannot give me a DNP because I have no negative quality indicators. This was told to the Wing Exec by some civilian chick at AETC HQ who deals with promotions. Is it true that our own O-6 Wing Commanders are neutered to the point that they can’t decide for themselves which box to check on a PRF unless a civilian at higher HQ gives them the green light or is this a load of $hit?
Thanks bros.
The AF says promote everyone. He'll have a hard time justifying a DNP without a reason you shouldn't be. Your best bet is still a letter to the board, since your reason is based on personal want, and not Air Force performance.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, bennynova said:

The CSAF actually just spoke about this at AFA.  They want squadron CCs, and in turn the senior Raters to DNP O-3s who they don't feel can serve as a major.    

 

Does es this apply to you?  Don't know.  But it wouldn't seem like you'd need a QFI to get a DNP.    

That’s exactly what I was thinking. It seems to me to be just another rogue GS-6 at AETC HQ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Duck said:

That’s exactly what I was thinking. It seems to me to be just another rogue GS-6 at AETC HQ.

I wouldn't call the person a rogue...this is a new policy that old procedures haven't caught up with.  GS-6s follow the procedures they're given.  I wouldn't expect one to just look at a policy memo (even from the CSAF) and then selectively interpret how to implement it.  Someone owes that person better guidance and instruction.  In any case, your SR and MLR will have a more authoritative take on implementation.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...