FY20 Chief Selection Board

[Guest EMN1]

15 hours ago, Ord3i said:

 “Per NAVADMIN 141/17, member exempt from PRT.”  It is not a detractor, missing a PFA or failing a portion of the PFA is a detractor.

what if block 43 doesn't clarify why you have a B in block 20?

[Guest jake_IT1]

[Guest Pebz]

9 hours ago, subguy10524 said:

Next Friday would be amazing, but I’m not holding my breath. I still expect a mid week Triad notification the week of July 30. Just makes sense to me!

Agreed. Our base DH meeting has put out for 2 weeks now that the season is starting on August 1st. 

[Guest Pebz]

For discussion: other senior enlisted people in a rate say the individual sitting the board hates people that are in a specific field. Let’s say...people that manage to stay shore duty the majority of their career or non-deploying sea rotations, as a loose example. Letting on that those people may not be judged fairly. Is there even time for that nonsense? We know what the guidance says about not holding duty stations and jobs and such against them. Real talk though... what would you think? 

[Guest Skipari]

8 hours ago, EMN1 said:

what if block 43 doesn't clarify why you have a B in block 20?

My last eval was written with no justification with the B as well. In my draft eval submission, I included the statement about the NAVADMIN 141/17 but someone along the lines of my chain of command took it out. Noone said boo to it. BL: its not in my eval either. FWIW, I'm not concerned about it. If I don't make CPO, I strongly doubt its going to be because I didn't spell out my waived PRT. After the board is done, they do a review of PRIMS. They'll get the answers there.

[HMtoCTN]

21 minutes ago, Pebz said:

For discussion: other senior enlisted people in a rate say the individual sitting the board hates people that are in a specific field. Let’s say...people that manage to stay shore duty the majority of their career or non-deploying sea rotations, as a loose example. Letting on that those people may not be judged fairly. Is there even time for that nonsense? We know what the guidance says about not holding duty stations and jobs and such against them. Real talk though... what would you think? 

The only reason I could see it being used against a Sailor is if the rating has a well defined sea/shore rotation, and the rating representative briefs that. However, if there were circumstances beyond the Sailors control that did not allow a Sailor to follow it as defined, personally I would write something about that in my LTB. Because we all know there are those Sailors who try to avoid it intentionally. 

[Guest Skipari]

5 minutes ago, Pebz said:

For discussion: other senior enlisted people in a rate say the individual sitting the board hates people that are in a specific field. Let’s say...people that manage to stay shore duty the majority of their career or non-deploying sea rotations, as a loose example. Letting on that those people may not be judged fairly. Is there even time for that nonsense? We know what the guidance says about not holding duty stations and jobs and such against them. Real talk though... what would you think? 

Thats what rating LaDRs are for. There is also typically at least one representative from each rate present at a board to give a community brief and answer questions regarding the details/opportunities in a rating. If your rating is shore-duty heavy and that's just the way things go, there's probably no harm done. The convening order says that geographic locations aren't a bad thing as long as you're basically progressing and not doing the same job over and over.

There is a prescribed sea/shore rotation though and I've been told a few times by past board members it's not a good look to deviate from that. If you have, it should probably be addressed in your eval or your LTB (if the circumstances were beyond your control). But, "real talk"-- if you've actively avoided deploying, I feel you've missed out on at least half of your leadership development. Deployments are the most stressful part of the job for most of us. The question being: How are you able to lead others though the toughest of times when you haven't experienced them yourself? That's just my humble opinion on that matter.

[Guest Pebz]

27 minutes ago, PO1(IW/FMF) said:

 Sailor is if the rating has a well defined sea/shore rotation, 

Just using the rotation as an example. Another example, let’s say a sailor that stays on one platform their whole career like this sailor has only been stationed with helos and the board member strongly dislikes people at helo squadrons. OR a board member that doesn’t like people that are FMF . I’m intentionally being vague but hope it's enough to make sense. 

[Guest Skipari]

2 minutes ago, Pebz said:

Just using the rotation as an example. Another example, let’s say a sailor that stays on one platform their whole career like this sailor has only been stationed with helos and the board member strongly dislikes people at helo squadrons. I’m intentionally being vague but hope it's enough to make sense. 

There's not just one person grading your package. It's not like Master Chief Helo-Hater is going to have end-all-be-all say on if you make Chief. If you do some digging on this forum and the internet, you'll find enough information on the board to see that they do a good job of eliminating the type of bias you're talking about.

[Guest Pebz]

2 minutes ago, Skipari said:

Thats what rating LaDRs are for. There is also typically at least one representative from each rate present at a board to give a community brief and answer questions regarding the details/opportunities in a rating.

Yeah, I see it’s going to be hard to get the input I’m intending but I can’t be more specific. Sailor is doing everything they are supposed to be doing. They have the right rotations, are above and beyond their ladr, and the representative is sour towards their specialty. For example, AWs. The hypothetical board member is an AWR and doesn’t like AWSs or AWFs so even the checks are in the box, there is bias. 

[HMtoCTN]

4 minutes ago, Pebz said:

Just using the rotation as an example. Another example, let’s say a sailor that stays on one platform their whole career like this sailor has only been stationed with helos and the board member strongly dislikes people at helo squadrons. I’m intentionally being vague but hope it's enough to make sense. 

I get what you are trying to say. Maybe I am naive but I had a CDR I worked for that has sat several boards and told me even though everyone talks poorly about the process, he said “it is the fairest process there is”. And this is a leader I trust unconditionally. Especially now with the LADRs laying out what is expected for each rating, I think it would be hard for the rating rep to sway the board that much. But I have obviously never been to a board so who knows. I would just hope that personal preferences, or prejudices for that matter, would be overcome to do what’s best for the rating and the Navy. 

[Guest Pebz]

2 minutes ago, Skipari said:

There's not just one person grading your package. It's not like Master Chief Helo-Hater is going to have end-all-be-all say on if you make Chief. If you do some digging on this forum and the internet, you'll find enough information on the board to see that they do a good job of eliminating the type of bias you're talking about.

Master Chief Helo-Hater. I like it. Thanks for that input. I agree with you, I say that’s why the checks and balances are in place. The bias can’t be proved anyway but it’s sad when it’s known. 

[Guest PO1_LS]

Hi new here but by the time results come out I will in the middle of a PCS and the command I’m coming from is decommissioned. Any idea if my new command will see the list if I haven’t checked in to them yet? Thanks for the help it’s my first time up

[Guest Pebz]

Sorry phone is flipping out now. Must have said something wrong. My bad. But appreciate the conversation. Let’s just say someone might have been told, good luck on making it, probably won’t happen because Master Chief Helo-Hater is on the board. So it sparked my curiosity in the reality behind something like that. 

[Guest Submarinecook1stclass]

23 minutes ago, Salirvip said:

Hi new here but by the time results come out I will in the middle of a PCS and the command I’m coming from is decommissioned. Any idea if my new command will see the list if I haven’t checked in to them yet? Thanks for the help it’s my first time up

If you put your current UIC on your exam. That’s where the results will go. Sometimes they are quick to update your UIC to your new command on your record, you just have to wait and see

[Guest OldAegis FC]

Hello all,

Been lurking for awhile but decided to join the discussion this year. First off, good luck to all of the selectees. Second, a quick question for the group. With all of the real world events going on, do you think the focus of the board has shifted from "well rounded" to tactically and technically proficient? In the convening order collateral duties was moved to the bottom unlike previous years, coincidence? Could that be the reason all position weren't filled? 

[HMtoCTN]

1 minute ago, OldAegis FC said:

Hello all,

Been lurking for awhile but decided to join the discussion this year. First off, good luck to all of the selectees. Second, a quick question for the group. With all of the real world events going on, do you think the focus of the board has shifted from "well rounded" to tactically and technically proficient? In the convening order collateral duties was moved to the bottom unlike previous years, coincidence? Could that be the reason all position weren't filled? 

At least the CNO has been pushing against so much weight for collaterals I’m glad it was finally updated in the convening order. But the conversation about tactically and technically proficient has been going on for a few years now. That’s one of the reasons the ratings have the ladrs now to call out what they are looking for. Some ratings don’t even have collaterals or fcpoa or Sailor 360 in their LADRs. Could very well be a reason all quotas not filled, among other things. 

[HMtoCTN]

34 minutes ago, Pebz said:

Sorry phone is flipping out now. Must have said something wrong. My bad. But appreciate the conversation. Let’s just say someone might have been told, good luck on making it, probably won’t happen because Master Chief Helo-Hater is on the board. So it sparked my curiosity in the reality behind something like that. 

I don’t think you said anything wrong bro. I love this forum. And one of the reasons is the discussions brought to it. And I think yours was one worth having. 

[Guest PO1_LS]

14 minutes ago, Submarinecook1stclass said:

If you put your current UIC on your exam. That’s where the results will go. Sometimes they are quick to update your UIC to your new command on your record, you just have to wait and see

Thanks. Guess I’ll find one way or another eventually. 

[Tony]

1 hour ago, Pebz said:

Sorry phone is flipping out now. Must have said something wrong. My bad. 

no problem, it's taken care of, thanks. 

[Ord3i]

10 hours ago, EMN1 said:

what if block 43 doesn't clarify why you have a B in block 20?

I think you would be fine.  the person who reviewed your record would have noticed that and then looked in PRIMS to verify.  A wiser person than me said that they don't have access to PRIMS.  I still wouldn't stress about it.

[HMtoCTN]

4 minutes ago, Ord3i said:

I think you would be fine.  the person who reviewed your record would have noticed that and then looked in PRIMS to verify.

They don’t have access to prims unless you send in with LTB

[Guest jake_IT1]

1 hour ago, Skipari said:

My last eval was written with no justification with the B as well. In my draft eval submission, I included the statement about the NAVADMIN 141/17 but someone along the lines of my chain of command took it out. Noone said boo to it. BL: its not in my eval either. FWIW, I'm not concerned about it. If I don't make CPO, I strongly doubt its going to be because I didn't spell out my waived PRT. After the board is done, they do a review of PRIMS. They'll get the answers there.

So your saying they do check prims?

[HMtoCTN]

22 minutes ago, jake_IT1 said:

So your saying they do check prims?

See my post above yours

[Guest Pebz]

Another discussion topic: What would be your opinion on a sailor with a practically maxed out ladr? Is there such thing as “too good” or “overqualified? 

And

How much weight would you think “filling role of LCPO” would hold in a write up?