Navy promotion idea

J

justme

Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2019
Messages
1,130
www.navytimes.com

Navy considers accelerating promotion timeline for junior officers

Officials stressed that any decision to accelerate Navy junior officer promotion has not yet been finalized.
www.navytimes.com www.navytimes.com

Sounds like it would be positively received by new officers.

Doing some web scanning, how would this compare to AF and Army? It seems like Army is already at 18 months, but is also earlier down the line as well?
 
Last edited:
Interesting considering they recently changed how enlistment advancement works for E1-E4, and a lot of sailors are unhappy with what they decided for that
 
Ivy22 said:
Interesting considering they recently changed how enlistment advancement works for E1-E4, and a lot of sailors are unhappy with what they decided for that
Click to expand...
Which was? Is it delayed or more difficult?
 
AF "O's" are:
2 Years O-1 to O-2
2 Years O-2 to O-3
@ 6 Years O-3 to O-4 (100% selection rate)
@3-4 Years O-4 to O-5
@ the 18th Year for fast moving O's to reach O-6.
@24th to 25th Year to get that first star of O-7

Roughly...
 
justme said:
www.navytimes.com

Navy considers accelerating promotion timeline for junior officers

Officials stressed that any decision to accelerate Navy junior officer promotion has not yet been finalized.
www.navytimes.com www.navytimes.com

Sounds like it would be positively received by new officers.

Doing some web scanning, how would this compare to AF and Army? It seems like Army is already at 18 months, but is also earlier down the line as well?
Click to expand...
Maby this belongs in its own thread, but here goes;

With officer retention so bad, why doesn't the Navy introduce Warrant Officers for technically demanding specialties like pilot? The Army has a high school-to-flight school program, but I think that officers will sometimes (maybe even often) convert their commission to a warrant. I feel like the Navy could do something similar, and basically allow avatars that won't make good commanders but are great pilots to stick around, honing their tactics, and teaching the next generation. I've heard some retired/reserve/guard pilots talk about this a little on podcasts, but was wondering if there is something wrong with it.

I'm just a simple SA applicant, but this seems like an obvious solution to me
 
I'm more a fan of just adding incentive pay rather than accelerated promotions.

Some are just not ready at 6-7 years for the responsibility of O-4. That's a minesweeper CO, detachment OIC, small shore station OIC, XO of a cruiser, XO of an SSN, etc. Pushing people into those positions when they are not ready and expecting them to just "rise to the challenge" is not a recipe for success. Even an extra couple of years means one additional tour and can make a big difference.
 
The way I read it is that the 6 YCS the article refers to is when one would be eligible for their first "below-zone" look. In theory, they are eligible for O-4, but the only people who would have a somewhat realistic chance at selection are your water-walking O-3s. They are probably ready for increased responsibility and the paygrade that comes with it. Your average O-3 would probably not be getting a selection on their first below-zone look. Additionally, the statutory boards can only select up to 10% of "below-zone" officers. This has to be balanced against selecting "in-zone" and "above-zone" officers."

A typical O-4 selection is between 8 and 10 YCS. @justme
 
Hopful_Mil_Kid said:
Maby this belongs in its own thread, but here goes;

With officer retention so bad, why doesn't the Navy introduce Warrant Officers for technically demanding specialties like pilot? The Army has a high school-to-flight school program, but I think that officers will sometimes (maybe even often) convert their commission to a warrant. I feel like the Navy could do something similar, and basically allow avatars that won't make good commanders but are great pilots to stick around, honing their tactics, and teaching the next generation. I've heard some retired/reserve/guard pilots talk about this a little on podcasts, but was wondering if there is something wrong with it.

I'm just a simple SA applicant, but this seems like an obvious solution to me
Click to expand...
Army Aviation WOs historically were a way to increase the number of Army pilots without violating commissioned officer quotas imposed after the Army and Air Force split. Now, they’re just as much about cost saving for the service as what a CW3 with commensurate time in service and flight experience is paid a lot less than an O4 in the Air Force and Navy. It briefs well to say they’re the technical experts dedicated to only flying but it’s hard to retain them when they can leave and make a lot more money flying commercially and that’s without them having multi engine jet engine time typically before they leave the service which a Navy WO pilot would have in most cases if they did this. Pilot retention is already hard enough, because we don’t pay military aviators to the same compensation what they can achieve in the civilian world. I wouldn’t want to add fire to that issue…
 
Hopful_Mil_Kid said:
Maby this belongs in its own thread, but here goes;

With officer retention so bad, why doesn't the Navy introduce Warrant Officers for technically demanding specialties like pilot? The Army has a high school-to-flight school program, but I think that officers will sometimes (maybe even often) convert their commission to a warrant. I feel like the Navy could do something similar, and basically allow avatars that won't make good commanders but are great pilots to stick around, honing their tactics, and teaching the next generation. I've heard some retired/reserve/guard pilots talk about this a little on podcasts, but was wondering if there is something wrong with it.

I'm just a simple SA applicant, but this seems like an obvious solution to me
Click to expand...
Yes, it sounds good, but also it would probably worsen aviation officer retention in a sense. Aviators do ground jobs (maintenance, admin, legal, safety) in addition to their flying. Flying is what keeps them around, not their ground jobs. Adding warrants to just be pilots sounds good, but that would just cause current aviation officers to see less flight time and turn into paper-pushers with wings. The personnel set up for aviation (and other officers) is to do a lot of the operating as a junior officer and build that experience to fall back on as they promote (and get into more managerial roles). Taking away officer operator time would lead to less informed decision-making and less-informed high-ranking officers because they would understand how real world ops work less and less.
 
I've always thought the RAF did it correctly. A pilot is given a choice when they're up for what we call "O-4." Do you wish to remain "Operational" or do you wish to branch "Command/Leadership?" If you choose "operational" you will be held to no higher than "Squadron Leader" (Major/O-4) for your entire career but you'll stay "operational" in the squadron, flying teaching, flying, becoming THE expert in your craft! If you choose the other direction, there will be (just like us) staff tours, schools, flying, desk jobs, flying, commands, etc. And you can move up the chain as far as your talent and the service agree.

I think that would work very well with us. I flew against some very "old" looking RAF Squadron Leaders in DACT flights...and even in jets that were "on paper and in fact" inferior to mine, these "elderly wizards" could do things that "the book" said they couldn't do. They were MASTERS of the ART!!

I think that'd be very beneficial for us and I can think of a lot of my contemporaries that would have taken that path if offered. Heck, I might have.
 
justme said:
When is current O4 promotion? I thought i saw it closer to 9 now?
Click to expand...
Can vary significantly depending on the community.

10-12 is about normal for URL. IW (except Intel, they're closer to URL) makes O-4s at around 7-9 years. The Navy also does a neat thing where you select for promotion but then don't promote until the end of the next fiscal year so there's just about a year between when you select and when you put on.
 
nuensis said:
Can vary significantly depending on the community.

10-12 is about normal for URL. IW (except Intel, they're closer to URL) makes O-4s at around 7-9 years. The Navy also does a neat thing where you select for promotion but then don't promote until the end of the next fiscal year so there's just about a year between when you select and when you put on.
Click to expand...
Similar to USAF in the last...we get selected and receive a "line number." Promotions then occur based upon your line number. So, if you're an early select...you might wait a year or more...
 
flieger83 said:
Similar to USAF in the last...we get selected and receive a "line number." Promotions then occur based upon your line number. So, if you're an early select...you might wait a year or more...
Click to expand...
Navy divides out 15% the first month (ends up being merit reorders and the most senior above zone selects), 3% each month until September, 55% in September.

If you do good enough you skip the line (merit reorder).
 
nuensis said:
Navy divides out 15% the first month (ends up being merit reorders and the most senior above zone selects), 3% each month until September, 55% in September.
Click to expand...
Actually not a regulation or (I'm pretty sure) not even a formal instruction but rather a notice as in a year by year decision which is called the "Promotion Plan" for the year.
 
OldRetSWO said:
Actually not a regulation or (I'm pretty sure) not even a formal instruction but rather a notice as in a year by year decision which is called the "Promotion Plan" for the year.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's been my point, there's nothing stopping the Navy from promoting everyone on first day of the fiscal year other than not paying a chunk of officers at the next paygrade. It's definitely not a seniority thing, I don't think we've cared about date of rank determining seniority for a while now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top