Jump to content

RJ09

Registered User
  • Posts

    18
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RJ09

  1. 16 hours ago, yellerfever said:

    The Air Force is once again showing disdain for their hardest working, highest performing people…that have the most options on the outside.

    IMG_0436.webp

    I tell you what; you can have my O-5 line number (I pin in 60 days) if the Air Force will let me early retire.  I'm in law school right now at Georgetown and I think my career will be much more promising on the outside and far less stressful.  Not a pilot though so I am one of the lower performer, less hard working people.  

  2. 1 minute ago, matmacwc said:

    Any gems?

    Most of those were deleted by AFPC, specifically the ones that referenced this site along with the intel that was posted regarding the reason of the delay etc.  But there are still some funny ones up there, in my opinion.  Like the one who posted today asking when is soon, as if they cannot comprehend 19 June is the release date and the ones that still think this board will have a promotion rate of 100%.  

     

  3. 1 minute ago, Fuzz said:

    There's a promotions page on portal? Like people actually use that website for more than hyperlinks to other mostly useless .mil websites?

    Yes, and there are several hundred comments that are on that page.  Why someone would comment on that page, especially since it displays name, rank, etc., to display rumors or news that isn't official is beyond me.  But alas, they do.   

  4. 2 hours ago, Duck said:

    Despite rumors on the AF Promotions Page, the SRs do not have the CY17D lists as of 1300 EST today. Gen Kelly, AFPC 2Star, announced via email that the 19th will be the release date. I called AFPC Promotions today and talked to the OIC. She told me that the big wigs at AFPC were having a meeting about the CY17D board around lunch today. She says that she is “hoping” to get the lists to the SRs by the end of this week and release the board sometime next week but has been told to hold onto them for now. I pressed her for the reason for the delays and she said that from her standpoint there is no reason to delay the release and it seems like they are just holding onto the results for no apparent reason.

    AFPC can't seem to get it together at any level.  

  5. I don't think the alleged 19 June release is going to hold for the CY17D board.  There hasn't been any public release announced and they have no officially stated whether or not it has fully cleared OSD.  AFPC seems to be out to lunch with regards to this.  

  6. 15 hours ago, flyusaf83 said:

    Then why the F did the AF give WG/CCs discretion?  Maybe a WG/CC could be in a better place to analyze an individual with negative indicators and make a more informed decision about their potential to perform at the next rank.

    I ask again.... just why in hell did we get rid of PRFs if they are going to go though everyone’s records more thoroughly?

    Good hell, who is running this clown show?

    That's a very good question.  Never said any of this made any sense.  

  7. 6 minutes ago, The_Vandall said:

    Agreed!  As far as I know though, the military is freely able to discriminate based upon medical status.  For instance, someone with asthma is essentially banned from any potential physically stressful military career (pilot, SOF, TACP, etc).  

    1

    To an extent permitted by law, which is why they have experts who adjudicate these matters through the MEB process and not the promotion board process.

    The reason it is taking so long is upon review at HAF, it was noticed that someone people who received a P from their commanders probably should not have when their record contained several QFIs that would otherwise make them not qualified to serve in the next higher grade.  Instead of attaching a PRF and/or sending a PRF, commanders just used this "new" process to slip them in.  As such, HAF went through every record to make sure those who were promoted actually "deserved it" based on members' OPRs, medals, TRs, and the OSB.  

    • Upvote 1
  8. 1 hour ago, The_Vandall said:

    Wild speculation here, but this is an opportunity for the AF to separate non-deployable and ALC-C coded folks without MEB'ing or re-MEB'ing them.  To separate someone solely based upon their medical status requires an MEB, but it's certainly possible to not promote someone based upon their medical status.  If a service twice non-selects someone, they can then force them to separate through Title 10, Section 632.  Typically, medical status is not directly considered during the promotion board (though it could be indirectly considered if a person's medical status prevents them from deploying).  Just speculation, but the DoD's Universal Retention Policy ("Deploy or Get Out") was released roughly a week before the board results made it to the SecAF (14 Feb and 21 Feb, respectively).

    1

    And they think they are getting sued now from HIV guy.  If the military stops promoting people based on medical status, I could see this going wrong in so many ways, it's not even funny.  And to pick a board that should've been 100% promote to test it out is beyond stupid.  

    • Like 1
  9. 2 hours ago, Duck said:

    I got a joke for ya. CY17D Majors board release date.

    In all seriousness, something is going on. I’ve never seen a board delayed this bad with ZERO explanation from our Senior Overlords.

    They are probably going to say: "Well that was a nice experiment.  We are going to file that one as evidence, throw the results out, and skip over '09.  CY18D will proceed without '09.  '09, thank you for your service; it reflects great credit upon yourself and the United States Air Force.  Now goodbye."

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
  10. 20 minutes ago, flyusaf83 said:

    My favorite part about the 09’ fiasco is that the board didn’t have any PRFs and that whole 100% opportunity to promote.  I guess this “simplification” made the board more difficult and time-consuming. I’m guessing they felt the need to sift through everyone's records, and disregard the “P” from the Wg/CCs.

    Oh, and our PRFs were written anyways. So much time saved.

    And they wonder why there is a retention problem.  Instead of remedying actually broken things, they break things and then attempt to fix what they just broke.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...