Jump to content

What's wrong with the Air Force?


Catbox

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Bigred said:

Being fairly new, I find it interesting how much attention is given to the CMSAF role and the person in it. In 19 years of the Navy, I couldn’t give you one name of a MCPON (Navy top enlisted).

I guess my point, the CMSAF seems it’s more about the person and less about the job. At least that’s my perception. 

In the AF there is a culture of pretending a SGT of any sorts is superior to an officer under the rank of O-6, and if they are an E-8/9 then maybe even more authority than an O-6. It’s perpetuated across career fields and weak officers let it happen. They even support it by telling young officers they need to shut up and listen to the Sgts. 
 

I’m sure you have already noticed, that compared to the Navy and USMC, authority is non existent in the Air Force below the wing commander level. A piece of paper stamped by an A1C holds more merit than the command authority granted to most “commanders.” The need for a squadron commander to ask “mother may I” through the group and wing CC, and in some cases to a star (like covid ETPs), is absurd. 

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Bigred said:

Being fairly new, I find it interesting how much attention is given to the CMSAF role and the person in it. In 19 years of the Navy, I couldn’t give you one name of a MCPON (Navy top enlisted).

I guess my point, the CMSAF seems it’s more about the person and less about the job. At least that’s my perception. 

You are correct.

May be an image of 3 people and people smiling

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2021 at 8:11 PM, Hacker said:

Standard AF answer. We only listen to the answers we want. Suppress the rest. She’s a terrible role model completely predictable, intentional product of the cancerous system of leadership that raised her, promoted her, and hired her

 

On 2/3/2021 at 8:49 AM, pawnman said:

While I don't fully disagree...didn't the same system produce Chief Wright?

Why was one so great and another so terrible?

Because the reality is the most important consideration in choosing leadership is making sure the candidates check the  appropriate diversity boxes.

Whether that is a misplaced priority is another discussion (I certainly don't agree with it).

When trying to fill a position like Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, you're already looking at a pretty small pool of eligible candidates.  Now, add a requirement that the selectee must fit some diversity checkbox, and all of a sudden the pool gets even smaller.  It's basic arithmetic.

Sometimes, within the small pool you're still able to find a good candidate.  Sometimes you don't.  Selecting someone for a position like this is an imperfect process to begin with, and there is no sure-fire way to success.  But the smaller you make the pool by adding extra constraints, the more chance you'll end up with some clown who doesn't know her ass from a hole in the ground.

Edited by Blue
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Blue said:

 

Because the reality is the most important consideration in choosing leadership is making sure the candidates check the  appropriate diversity boxes.

Whether that is a misplaced priority is another discussion (I certainly don't agree with it).

When trying to fill a position like Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, you're already looking at a pretty small pool of eligible candidates.  Now, add a requirement that the selectee must fit some diversity checkbox, and all of a sudden the pool gets even smaller.  It's basic arithmetic.

Sometimes, within the small pool you're still able to find a good candidate.  Sometimes you don't.  Selecting someone for a position like this is an imperfect process to begin with, and there is not sure fire way to success.  But the smaller you make the pool by adding extra constraints, the more chance you'll end up with some clown who doesn't know her ass from a hole in the ground.

They skipped over the usual MAJCOM Chiefs and went deeper into the NAFs (non-standard) to select her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Blue said:

 

Because the reality is the most important consideration in choosing leadership is making sure the candidates check the  appropriate diversity boxes.

Whether that is a misplaced priority is another discussion (I certainly don't agree with it).

When trying to fill a position like Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, you're already looking at a pretty small pool of eligible candidates.  Now, add a requirement that the selectee must fit some diversity checkbox, and all of a sudden the pool gets even smaller.  It's basic arithmetic.

Sometimes, within the small pool you're still able to find a good candidate.  Sometimes you don't.  Selecting someone for a position like this is an imperfect process to begin with, and there is not sure fire way to success.  But the smaller you make the pool by adding extra constraints, the more chance you'll end up with some clown who doesn't know her ass from a hole in the ground.

Perhaps.

It's unfortunate because I personally worked with other black female chiefs who would be doing a far better job than Chief Bass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, uhhello said:

They skipped over the usual MAJCOM Chiefs and went deeper into the NAFs (non-standard) to select her.

And from what I've heard, as soon as they announced they were looking into NAFs, everyone knew the game was rigged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GKinnear said:

And from what I've heard, as soon as they announced they were looking into NAFs, everyone knew the game was rigged.

Of course the game is rigged. She checks two important diversity boxes, and she was solely hired off that. She wasn't the best person for the job, and it currently shows via her buffoonery on social media.

Edited by Sua Sponte
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

Of course the game is rigged. She checks two important diversity boxes, and she was solely hired off that. She wasn't the best person for the job, and it currently shows via her buffoonery on social media.

If only they'd dug deeper than NAF, they'd have found more qualified people who ALSO checked diversity boxes instead of someone who homesteaded at Ramstein for 15 years.

Edited by pawnman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, MyCS said:

Wait what.. counting on toes 🦶 and fingers 🖐️. My public school math skills at work.

Pawnman off the top rope with the peoples elbow!

 

Quick question. My boy (officer) in cyber has been stationed in Italy, Korea, Germany, TX, CO, and FL. You guys ever wonder what life would have been like selecting a different job with the opportunity to PCS anywhere? 

I would never trade being a pilot for cyber but yes, his locations definitely beat my Pope, Vance, Whiteman, Osan, & Columbus!

I would say my locations are still better than Cannon, Holloman, Minot, & Laughlin.  But that’s my opinion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FLEA said:

Why she isn't already removed for this is beyond me. 

Optics.

Can't preach diversity then remove your diversity hire only a few months in.  Or less than a full month into the Biden administration, which also ran on a platform of diversity.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Duck said:

How in the world did she even make E-9??? Never mind, I know why, forget I asked.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

And here a year ago I was told I was passed over for Lt Col because I didn't have enough "career broadening" (although on the new boards broken down by category...my time in the cockpit suddenly became valuable enough to get promoted.  So I guess I win).

Ah, well...guess I'll just have to console myself with my aviation bonus money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Tiger said:

Just curious, did anyone here receive an email about filling out some sort of survey for Bass?  I was sent a word document asking me to write in problems with the Air Force, and suggested solutions. Supposedly the answers are going straight to Bass in a non-attribution manner.

On the one hand...I don't believe anything coming directly from my own email is non-attribution.

On the other hand...I already have a line number to Lt Col.  So not exactly afraid of a chief at any level.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Just curious, did anyone here receive an email about filling out some sort of survey for Bass?  I was sent a word document asking me to write in problems with the Air Force, and suggested solutions. Supposedly the answers are going straight to Bass in a non-attribution manner.


Is it on the AF-approved survey list?...Or is the CMSAF going off script and ignoring AF policy?
a705d5c52e5a25ba8b8f6a5ef66b1fba.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Day Man said:

stop posting your trolling Shazaam shit in irrelevant threads?

Careful, last time I called him out he went and found my last 18 posts and down voted all of them, lol.

Edited by MCO
  • Like 1
  • Haha 3
  • 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...