Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Military Promotions

  1. #31
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    4,263
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    Yeah, obviously my background is audit/accounting/finance, not specifically government agencies, but this process does not seem appropriate. The relevant legal opinion is that these officers are embodying the sovereign authority of the United States, which is why they require confirmation. You don't need 3 day C-SPAN hearings for every position, but there should at least be a legally required GAO certification that the process is above-board, which should include auditing a certain number of selections to ensure that the process is being followed.
    I believe this is what AR said was done in his post above yours. The Army does the vetting which seems beyond the average staffer whether at the White House or Senate who doesn't know one officer from the other 1215 officers up for promotion. With the fact that it is not unknown for Senators not to have read bills they vote on why on earth would they go through 1216 jackets? Now do you think you have a better way for civilians to assess field grade officers?

  2. #32
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,727
    Quote Originally Posted by tbm3fan View Post
    I believe this is what AR said was done in his post above yours. The Army does the vetting which seems beyond the average staffer whether at the White House or Senate who doesn't know one officer from the other 1215 officers up for promotion. With the fact that it is not unknown for Senators not to have read bills they vote on why on earth would they go through 1216 jackets? Now do you think you have a better way for civilians to assess field grade officers?
    They don't need to go through 1200 individual assessments, the strategy would be to have the Government Accountability Office validate that the overall process makes sense and has appropriate controls, and audit whatever number they feel need to be audited to ensure the process is being followed. There's a big space between rubber-stamping and multiple day hearings on the Hill. Trying to duck building a control because it is hard or creates another headache is typically a great way to end up with a giant cluster-fuck down the line.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  3. #33
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,128
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    They don't need to go through 1200 individual assessments, the strategy would be to have the Government Accountability Office validate that the overall process makes sense and has appropriate controls, and audit whatever number they feel need to be audited to ensure the process is being followed.
    Those 1200 are just the Armys 0-6 promotions. You also have the other 3 services list to do. Then there are the 0-4 to 0-5 and 0-7 and above. For all 4 services. (Not sure how the USCG is handled as part of Homeland Security) There are over 236 thousand commissioned officers on active duty. Assume that 25% are up promotion on any given year. And the selection rate for any given MOS is 40% to 75% Depending on the needs of the service and the branch. Who would the GAO hire that knows the difference in the selection for promotion of a Intel officer vice the selection of an Infantry or Supply officer. Or even a Marine 0-6 verses an USAF 0-6. There is no "One size fits all" checklist for military promotions.

    Trust the members of the selection board
    Human Scum. Proud Never Trumper

  4. #34
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,727
    I would say "In God I trust, all others I audit," but double-slit experiments make me want to audit the Holy Ledger too. There's definite funny business.

    I'm not putting this at the top of any major list, but there's a Constitutional duty that everyone agrees exists that everyone is just hand-waving. That stinks to high heaven. The members of the Selection Board aren't elected by anyone and should be subject to some measure of oversight by elected representatives. If everyone agrees that this is overkill (and I personally don't, but again, I'm not wedded to anything and this isn't exactly top of my list of priorities), there's a mechanism within the Constitution to modify its provisions. Setting up a norm that we're just going to bypass provisions because they are inconvenient is corrosive.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  5. #35
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,128
    Human Scum. Proud Never Trumper

  6. #36
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    9,186
    GVChamp,

    Hardly against the law or any federal regulations.

    It all falls within the Title 10 USC authority of the Department of Defense. The vast majority of the Services are left to our own devices. We fall within the Uniformed Code of Military Justice for most things. Service members give up many of what would be considered basic civil rights to the civilian culture in return for being able to govern our own advancements. Only those ranks which equate or show potential to equate to Senior Executive Service of Civil Service need to be reviewed by the Senate IAW the Title 10, USC. It is much like the Civil Service...I am a Civilian employee of the US Army and my grade is NH-4...that means I am a Major-Lieutenant Colonel-Colonel equivalent within DOD but with authority tied to duty position, not rank. My band is like that for pay purposes.

    Where I lie within that band the Senate has no say outside of approving the line item of the budget which governs my agency. Beyond that it is completely within the purview of the Director and Subordinate Leaders where I work.

    Same for officers below Colonel.
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 53
    Last Post: 19 Apr 09,, 00:27
  2. Military Art
    By Canmoore in forum Multimedia & Jukebox room
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03 Sep 07,, 22:48

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •