Promotion and PRF Information

[Learjetter]

I know several folks with families, jobs (ARC, airlines, and/or non-flying civilian organizations), and/or real graduate schools who would laugh at you for making that statement.  I guess that's not the audience you were thinking of. 

Not surprised that someone on a promotion board would think like you, though.  Speaks volumes. 

I'll try to explain: I'm not talking about Palace chase type programs. Look, you volunteered to serve for your ADSC, if you don't have a humanitarian/medical reason for getting out early, you're trying to renege on your end of the deal, and that's not cool. It's also not cool for the AF to renege on their end of the deal (rotc recat, tami21, stoploss etc). Is it widely viewed as acceptable behavior in ARC/airlines/non-flying civilian orgs/real graduate schools to not keep your word?

Ways to get out early: fail PT tests, commit a crime, refuse a deployment, malinger, violate a sufficient number of standards over time, choose not to upgrade from wingman or copilot, bust lots of check rides or cheat on tests, take leave in Colorado and smoke dope, say something lewd and degrading to fellow airmen in every staff meeting, etc. All of those ways will result in discipline first, then a less-than-glowing OPR on your way out the door. Now, to what audience will such an OPR be appealing and amusing?

This line of thinking is one the effects of being in the regular AF too long. There is life after and apart from BIG BLUE!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This line of thinking is one of the effects of being a dumbass.

You're right, there is life after the AF, and it comes quickly...so serve ably and professionally as you agreed to, take advanatge of the opportunities presented to you, always take care of your airmen, then press on to ARC or NASA or corporate or blogger land or wherever with the admiration and gratitude of your fellow airmen. If you're so unsatisfied as to need to change careers right now, go read up on how to separate, then resign your commission in writing to your commander, take whatever lumps come your way and move on.

Please state reason?  I find this potentially concerning. 

 

Look at any board's stats: DPs are never 100% promoted...its always 98-99%. Usually, that's due to stuff in the record that occurs late in the cycle like new article 15 or criminal indictment, or don't promote me letters, or occasionally, a record that doesn't justify a the DP but the SR gave it to him anyway. These situations are NOT common and you'd know it if you were in one of them.

Similarly, once in a while there is a DNP that gets promoted. They will value things the board doesnt, or vice versa.

Hypothetical Example: a rescue officer was APZ with no strats on a weak DNP PRF. But, on his poorly written OPRs, he had 14 saves, 9 in combat, a BSM with valor, and two purple hearts, and fairly normal line career progression (but no schoolhouse, or exec or aide or staff tours), and was in a stressed career field. His 2nd to most recent OPR was a referral for off base DUI (and the reason for the DNP), but the LOR & rebuttal in the record confirmed he only got a reckless driving citation, not a DUI. The board valued his experiences, recognized the rehabilitative nature of the discipline he received (good OPR after the bad one) and scored him much higher than the SR obviously did, and he made the list. The board thought his experiences would lead to him being a very effective future combat and peacetime leader of airmen. This kind of situation is also not common.

There's a lot more to the board process than just a quick look at the PRF, which is merely a recommendation by the SR. Every OPR, every medal citation, every document in the record is read and assessed. Variances in scores between panel members are verbally discussed...sometimes for a very long time...I remember one that we tabled twice during the day and probably spent close to an hour discussing late into the evening. We spend two weeks doing this process, and get pretty good at assessing future potential from the records.

Finally, I'd prefer if you asked questions, but keep throwing spears and making snide comments if you want--it's a flyers God-given right after all. My skin is thick. I'm happy with my performance and career path and results, and I thought some of you might find these perspectives useful.

LJ

[Lord Ratner]

words

I disagree on one point. Not getting promoted does not mean the same thing and reneging on the contract (even if that is the end goal). You don't need to get promoted for the AF to keep you in, they can continue you should they choose. Forcing promotion on someone who doesn't want it is silly, and only an organization that habitually mismanages personnel through stubbornness and inexperience could fail to recognize that.

If you don't want people with bright futures sabotaging their careers, ask yourself why the system is making them that way, and fix it. Or don't. The nice thing about the military is that very, very few leaders are ever truly accountable for their organizational management decisions.

[guineapigfury]

The rules don't prohibit you from writing a Don't Promote Me Letter or a crappy PRF rough draft to hand into your supervisor.  The rules just specify the consequences.  Make your decision and live with it.  This is not reneging on your contract.  Big Blue will always use the AFIs to its advantage, turnabout is fair play.

[pawnman]

Touche.  Wg/CC stratted me top 5 percent.  MLR deemed me bottom 40 percent.  Makes sense.  Good system. 

I feel you.  I went to the promotion board with multiple #1/xx strats and a FLT/CC of the year award at the OG level.  I also got a P.

[bennynova]

Thanks, LJ

 

. Glad to hear the recent boards are adhering to the new secaf memorandum to promote the best, and ignore promotion zone

Edited December 10, 2015 by bennynova

[zach braff]

Got a homie who met O-5 board APZ with a P and made it.  I somehow got the IDE designator on my O-4 board while another dude who my SR stratted higher than me did not.  Evidence would appear the boards really are looking at records and not only the SR bottom line.  I hope it continues...

zb

[Muscle2002]

10 hours ago, bennynova said:

Thanks, LJ

 

. Glad to hear the recent boards are adhering to the new secaf memorandum to promote the best, and ignore promotion zone

 

7 hours ago, zach braff said:

Got a homie who met O-5 board APZ with a P and made it.  I somehow got the IDE designator on my O-4 board while another dude who my SR stratted higher than me did not.  Evidence would appear the boards really are looking at records and not only the SR bottom line.  I hope it continues...

zb

On the BPZ side, I know a handful who were picked up early with just a P, which again supports the idea that the board looks at the whole record.

[Duck]

Is it a requirement to put your strats on your PRF? Do boards actually look through your OPRs or mainly focus on the surf and PRF?

[guineapigfury]

I put mine together earlier this year.  There were rules on how many could go on which lines.  To the best of my knowledge this was purely local guidance.  If you're a dude like me with 1 amazing OPR with multiple strats, and several pedestrian OPRs this made things difficult.

[Learjetter]

Is it a requirement to put your strats on your PRF? Do boards actually look through your OPRs or mainly focus on the surf and PRF?

Your SR should do your PRF IAW MAJCOM guidance. The SR normally delegates the initial draft to Sq/cc. You may be asked for inputs by your flt/cc.

In creating the PRFs, I saw it done/ did it the pretty much the same way from 2000-2015: IAW an AFPC / MAJCOM message, about 60 days prior to the board, the drafts were due for the groups to the wing (or their equiv positions on staff). They were tweaked or re-written and run thru admin review, then presented to the SR, along with each officers entire record. The SR would dedicate hours to read each record, any accompanying push notes, and make any changes to each and every PRF. Then they went off to MLR and DPS were awarded, the forms signed by the SR, then they went to AFPC for the board and you got your copy 30 days prior to the board.

(Ps: never get the rep as a good OPR or PRF writer...that stink never rubs off and as a result I probably redid a thousand decorations, OPRs and PRFs that werent on my folks outside the ones I did during my two wing exec tours).

I can only speak for myself, but yes, I read every word of every record. My technique:

The big screen monitor holds three "electronic" stacks of paper on the screen for each record, appopriately magnified for our geriatric eyes.. On the right, the PRF and all OPRs. In the center, decorations and "other stuff" like a-15 or lors. On the left, the DQHB and letters to the board.

I'd open a record and start with the surf/dqhb. Then move to the middle and read the decorations. Finally, flip to the back of the stack and read OPRs earliest to latest. Only then world I read the PRF and score the record.

Bottom line: it's all important, not just the surf or the PRF.

[Duck]

Thanks LJ!

[bennynova]

Is all of this a new board policy?

 

were the best records all promoted 3 years ago?  Or were passed over packages downgraded and given little to no consideration?

[Learjetter]

I dunno. BPZ / IPZ / APZ has never meant much to me. I got promoted on time, every time. Championed and got DPs for some of my guys on every recent board...in every zone.

Stellar is stellar

Strong is strong

OK is OK

What's "zone" got to do with documented duty performance? In my book, nothing.

Others think differently, so YMMV.

[bennynova]

Based on your comments, I'm guessing you've only sat on one board, in CY15 then?

 

my understanding has been that ABZ individuals were always tossed aside in previous calendar years, but I heard that the secaf made a change to CY15 boards and beyond in that the board would score every package based on its own merits and not take into consideration the BTZ, ABZ, ITZ aspect of it.   I don't know if CY15 boards followed this directive.   Was awaiting current board results to see if it was evident one way or the other  

[Learjetter]

I think it's unusual for any line Colonel to sit on more than one board in a career. Perhaps in specialty AFSCs.

Not permitted to disclose any Secaf instructions (specifically), but all boards have 'em, and comparing results demographics year to year leads me to believe you may be making the right assumption. I.E. if there were 9 APZ promotions on each of the Cy11,12 O4 boards, then 68 APZ promotions on each of the Cy13,14 boards...then something is different about the way the board is scoring APZ records...or the promotion opportunity % is different...or there's something special about how the board treated those individual officer's records.

[Dupe]

LJ-

 Did going to a small school vice ACSC count for anything at the board?

Was a DP/P from the school MLR treated any different than a DP/P from a DT?

[bennynova]

thanks for the info LJ.   

  I have the actual memorandum to the board for CY15. im well aware of the paragraph stating promotion zone is not supposed to be negatively factored in to this years boards.  So I want asking clarification on that.  

 

 I was curious as to if board members would actually heed that directive, or skip by it and score per CY14 scoring directions.  Seeing as though board members have to somewhat agree on a score range, the answer may be pretty easy to guess

 

 I may have to Track down the CY 13 or 14 memorandum to the board to see exactly how different they are.

[matmacwc]

The rescue officer story, good to hear, breath of fresh air.

[Learjetter]

LJ-

 Did going to a small school vice ACSC count for anything at the board?

Was a DP/P from the school MLR treated any different than a DP/P from a DT?

Speaking only for me: the more selective the school, the better that was viewed in scoring the record. But an awesome school record with little or no-impact operational duty wasn't as good as a "lesser" school record with awesome operational performance. All PRFs given equal weight. Can't recall any PRFs from DTs.

LJ

[Muscle2002]

6 hours ago, Learjetter said:

Speaking only for me: the more selective the school, the better that was viewed in scoring the record. But an awesome school record with little or no-impact operational duty wasn't as good as a "lesser" school record with awesome operational performance. All PRFs given equal weight. Can't recall any PRFs from DTs.

LJ

LJ, how did you view those who received PME credit for such programs as AFIP, TPS, Olmsted, etc?  The AF seems to be moving away from granting credit, so I wonder if IDE/SDE credit is looked upon in an unfavorable fashion.

[Learjetter]

PME not done is not good. You need that educational experience and knowledge to better be able to accomplish the really hard work the AF needs done...like budgets, contracts, multi-FY programs, acquisitions, plans, etc. Tactical flying requires a simpler body of knowledge (yes, even for carnivores) than serious staff work and planning and executing an air war.

For non-res PME, timing irrelevant to me, personally, but earliest completion of was viewed more positively by some.

Again, the more selective the program, the better it was viewed.

But, we're talking small potatoes compared to the duty performance and leadership captured in the record. That's the single biggest determinator. Fail at that, and no school, any other program, will make up for it.

[TnkrToad]

On December 11, 2015 at 9:24 PM, bennynova said:

my understanding has been that ABZ individuals were always tossed aside in previous calendar years, but I heard that the secaf made a change to CY15 boards and beyond in that the board would score every package based on its own merits and not take into consideration the BTZ, ABZ, ITZ aspect of it.   I don't know if CY15 boards followed this directive.   Was awaiting current board results to see if it was evident one way or the other  

If the above is in fact true, one could take this as both very good news and as an indicator of how much the AF has screwed the pooch manning-wise:

TLDR version: Rated force mismanagement + extended airline hiring boom = some very tough choices when it comes to selecting AF leaders. Ignoring BPZ/IPZ/APZ status is a good idea which is long overdue, but it's a bandaid fix at this point.

- Disregarding BPZ/IPZ/APZ status is, in my estimation, a good move, and one that should have been done long ago. Widening the pool of candidates will help ensure the best folks get promoted. I would hope in current year and future boards, the board members would find themselves seriously discussing the relative merits of promoting experienced, above-average performers who barely missed the IPZ promotion cut, IPZ folks who are hovering near the cut line, and BPZ superior performers who likely have significantly less real-world experience, having spent many years in school. The O-6 board meets in the zone at the 20 year point: would you rather select a 20-yr IPZ guy, who's somewhere around the 50th percentile of his year group, a 22-yr APZ type who just barely missed the IPZ cut but who's continued performing well, or a 16-yr dude who's a total of 4 yrs BPZ (2 yrs below to O-5 and O-6)--and has spent multiple years in school/staff/exec/etc.? Obviously depends on the individuals being discussed, but I can imagine a number of cases where it'd be wiser to promote the APZ guy over the BPZ guy with 6 years (likely more, considering time spent out of the cockpit) less operational experience.

- On a less positive note, I read this as an admission that the Air Force has grossly mismanaged its force, especially wrt pilot types. From what I can tell, the APZ year groups are a pretty picked-over lot; the AF produced so relatively few pilots from the 92/93/94 year groups that the majority of high-quality folks have already made O-6 or got out after 20yrs, or never even made it to retirement. The IPZ year group is much the same. Those who stayed past retirement eligibility, aren't already O-6s/O-6 selects, and who didn't spend their careers in the USAFA self-licking ice cream cone (AF funded civlian master's program, to teaching at USAFA, to AF funded civilian phd program, to teaching at USAFA)--or some other similar good deal--are extremely few in number. Bottom line, the Air Force has goofed up manning so badly that it needs to widen the aperture significantly in order to replace the late-Cold War O-6s who are retiring/getting promoted. 

       The problem is, the '96 and later year groups are short of folks, too, and the airline hiring boom will provide a powerful incentive for those folks to retire and never even meet their O-6 boards. If the boards really do ignore APZ/IPZ/BPZ status, that'll work great for a year or two. Some very deserving folks will get selected APZ, and some young true superstars will get opportunities they would not have gotten as early as they would have previously. Once those outliers are picked up over a promotion cycle or two, though, you'll be startled in a year or two by some of the folks selected. Boards will be choosing between guys who are either good dudes, but were never groomed for leadership (and their organizations will suffer for it), and those who've spent a whole lotta time being groomed, but have little operational credibility . . . to an even worse degree than previously. 

TT

Edited December 12, 2015 by TnkrToad
grammer

[17D_guy]

12 hours ago, TnkrToad said:

If the above is in fact true, one could take this as both very good news and as an indicator of how much the AF has screwed the pooch manning-wise:

TLDR version: Rated force mismanagement + extended airline hiring boom = some very tough choices when it comes to selecting AF leaders.

TT

It's happening in Cyber as well.  Very many people who aren't prior are bouncing.  They're tired of the deployments, lack of command clarity, inability to (usually) make positive changes with their customers and for the base support, being cast aside for the sexiness of Offensive/Defensive Cyber.  Who flies planes anymore.. so silly....

We just had our Summer '16 PCS webinar, total AFSC manning currently at 84%, IF you count the new 2Lt's in FY15.  Overall, they'll be filling only 60% of positions requiring a body that cycle.  People are just tired, and the experience and certifications we're walking out with aren't run of the mill server-farm experience.  Starting salary for a lot of these is around six figures.

Hell, the trend lines for the mid 90's folks, and mid-00 folks is well below the sustainment line.  I wasn't a O then, but I seem to remember my bosses (jr-mid Capts) were getting RIF'd at ton in '06-'08... and that was "before the drawdown."

Anyway, has anyone noticed a change in the Maj's getting promoted?  With the increased scrutiny Learjet I was wondering if it had also moved down to O-4 as well.  There's been numerous people who haven't made it I was surprised at.

[GKinnear]

If the above is in fact true, one could take this as both very good news and as an indicator of how much the AF has screwed the pooch manning-wise:

TLDR version: Rated force mismanagement + extended airline hiring boom = some very tough choices when it comes to selecting AF leaders.

TT

It's happening in Cyber as well.  Very many people who aren't prior are bouncing.  They're tired of the deployments, lack of command clarity, inability to (usually) make positive changes with their customers and for the base support, being cast aside for the sexiness of Offensive/Defensive Cyber.  Who flies planes anymore.. so silly....

We just had our Summer '16 PCS webinar, total AFSC manning currently at 84%, IF you count the new 2Lt's in FY15.  Overall, they'll be filling only 60% of positions requiring a body that cycle.  People are just tired, and the experience and certifications we're walking out with aren't run of the mill server-farm experience.  Starting salary for a lot of these is around six figures.

Hell, the trend lines for the mid 90's folks, and mid-00 folks is well below the sustainment line.  I wasn't a O then, but I seem to remember my bosses (jr-mid Capts) were getting RIF'd at ton in '06-'08... and that was "before the drawdown."

Anyway, has anyone noticed a change in the Maj's getting promoted?  With the increased scrutiny Learjet I was wondering if it had also moved down to O-4 as well.  There's been numerous people who haven't made it I was surprised at.

The Comm Field was a high pick on my dream sheet 16ish years ago, when a plan to do my 4 yrs and walk. At the time, I knew Doctors who were leaving medicine to work for telecoms and getting 3x the pay. I would think the current environment is even more magnified. But what do I know, that personnelist is a really good leader and more deserving than everyone else.

[Duck]

How were PT fails looked at? Auto DNP for most?