MombaBomba
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2014
- Messages
- 420
As far as where the lines are that can be crossed, the cadets are counseled when their performance in whatever area, is substandard. The academy isn't going to publish an article or website listing all of their standards. Just like most job interviews don't tell you why you didn't get the job. Or why "At Will" employees aren't always told why they are being let go. It's not important that the academy post or publish some place all of their standards. What is important, is that the cadets know what is expected of them. That they are counseled when their performance doesn't meet standards. And that they know what will happen if they don't improve. And I assure you, the cadets know these things. They may not like them. They may not agree with the evaluation sometimes. But they do know them. And because these cadets are either legal adults of 18 years or greater; or they are emancipated individuals who signed the paper with their parents permission; that's all that matters.
It isn't about if it was the right decision or if the basic is counseled enough or properly. It isn't even about a specified published list. I don't think any of us civilian parents expected something that detailed. At least, I did not expect that. It is about the type of thing that can get someone kicked out, outside of the obvious (stealing, cheating, drugs etc..) from the academy before Acceptance.
For instance, an attitude problem. What constitutes an attitude problem? I know as a civilian what I would consider crossing the line, but at the Academy and in the military that line may be different.
We cut injuries by over a third, beat the record for inprocessing by 2 hours, and had a Form 34 rate less than a half a percent higher than last year, including the much greater number of basics who were found unfit to enter the wing by a board at the end of the summer.
(The emphasis is mine)
What constitutes being unfit to enter the wing by a board? As a civilian, I am confused. The way I interpret the statement above implies that the basic is physically unfit. How would a basic be disqualified based upon physical fitness as the basic had to achieve a minimal CFA score to be accepted and basics can be placed in recondo if they fail to meet the PFT minimal standards during the PFT/AFT tests. I understand turn backs due to injury or even a serious enough injury resulting in medical disqualification, but I don't understand how a cadet can be "unfit" enough to be disqualified, unless "unfit" encompasses more than just "physical fitness."
This isn't about questioning the Academy's or military's authority or their judgement. This is an attempt understand the environment and expectations.