Army lowering it standards.......again? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Army lowering it standards.......again?


urbanjunglist
11-13-2006, 01:23
I find it truly amazing that the Army is having a tough time retaining "people". I care not to call them soldiers because from what I seen before in my deployments was just garbage. It really makes good quality soldiers(if the shoe fits wear it) look bad. I seen this spec 4 that looked like he could be my grand father, whats up with that? I admire people who want to serve there country but come on people, what good is he really going to do when the @#$% goes down? Another question is is the Army ACU's supposed to be form fitting? I seen one soldier walking around in some that looked like spandex, what gives?

FDC
11-13-2006, 17:03
Originally posted by urbanjunglist
I find it truly amazing that the Army is having a tough time retaining "people". I care not to call them soldiers because from what I seen before in my deployments was just garbage. It really makes good quality soldiers(if the shoe fits wear it) look bad. I seen this spec 4 that looked like he could be my grand father, whats up with that? I admire people who want to serve there country but come on people, what good is he really going to do when the @#$% goes down? Another question is is the Army ACU's supposed to be form fitting? I seen one soldier walking around in some that looked like spandex, what gives?

You don't get out much do you? Yeah, there are *****bags in every unit. Instead of griping about it, look in the mirror, then square away every violater you see.

ETA: Be part of the solution.

urbanjunglist
11-13-2006, 18:08
The Army so fit to make "their solution the problem". Do I need say more? THE ARMY IS LOWERING THEIR STANDARDS TO MAKE MISSION........ I can go on and on with this. Granted every unit has its own turds, it doesnt help letting more in.

FDC
11-13-2006, 20:16
Originally posted by urbanjunglist
The Army so fit to make "their solution the problem". Do I need say more? THE ARMY IS LOWERING THEIR STANDARDS TO MAKE MISSION........ I can go on and on with this. Granted every unit has its own turds, it doesnt help letting more in.

Please "go on and on". While I definitely agree, some standards have been adjusted it's still what happens in the unit that makes the Soldier.

Note---An example of "adjusted" would be previously allowing a small number of Cat IVs in. Now we increase that number slightly.

urbanjunglist
11-13-2006, 20:52
Im not trying to bad mouth the Army in all means, but Im really trying to understand the method for their madness on that.

FDC
11-14-2006, 20:18
I'll be the 1st to admit the quality of new Soldiers has gone downhill since I came in in 92. While I'm sure every generation of Soldiers looks at the new guys, and thinks "are we scraping the bottom of the barrel?", I believe the mean quality of new Soldiers has slipped.
I truthfully don't feel it's a case of the Army "lowering standards", I think it's a case of the Army adjusting to the current pool of recruits. Do I agree with it? In most cases NO, but it really isn't that bad.
You may see a whole bunch of stats about letting criminals in. Some of that is society's fault by charging kids for every stupid thing under the sun. Also, some of it is technology. A recruit used to be able to get away with concealing law violations as long as his job didn't require a clearance. Now the ENTNAC comes back within 48 hours, and there is no hiding the law violation. Recruiters are being forced to list all the violations, and run moral waivers. hence the appearance we allow more criminals in.
As far as age goes, I do believe the Army is adjusting to the market. I don't like it. I know there are quite a few guys in their late 30s that would be better Soldiers than ANY punk kid. I still believe the Army is a young man's game.
Body fat/weight standards are pretty cut and dry for anyone going through MEPS. Weight issues in the unit is a failure on the individual, and the unit's leadership. All it takes is a little PT, or a little paperwork to fix a weight problem. The individual fails by gaining the weight. The leadership fails by not PTing/dieting the crap out of the offender. The unit also fails by not thoroughly documenting the weight failures, and then kicking them out. Many units do this well, some don't.
Anyone who thinks the Army has "lowered standards for initial enlistment" should review AR 601-210. It's not that easy to squeeze someone into the "fully qualified" category according to that reg. Anyone who thinks the Army has "lowered standards for initial enlistment" should be prepared to walk for 3 years in a recruiter's shoes.

urbanjunglist
11-14-2006, 22:00
Im seriously looking into a interservice transfer into the Army and going warrant officer with the flight program. I just look around and see soldiers these days and ask myself if I really want to "down grade". Granted the Marine Corps has its share of overweight people, at least they are more stringent on the rules governing if they are "accepted" into either enlistment or if they get there commissioned as either a warrant or regular officer. My job as a NCO is to enforce the rules and regulations governing the Marine Corps (as well as the armed forces). Maybe Im overlooking something how the Army "runs things".

Sam White
11-15-2006, 15:13
FDC made an excellent post. The entry standards aren't any "lower" than they were in the past: it's on the soldier and the soldier's unit to enforce the standards once that soldier leaves Basic and AIT.

The difference you see between the Marine Corps and the Army, IMO, is a difference in the nature of the services. The Marines have a culture of being hard, fit, warriors. Much of the Army feels the same but there is also a large element of the Army that sees it as "just a job." The Army is also the largest of the services and needs more bodies.

The unit I served in was a Reserve unit and was a support unit (chemical), so that's my point of reference. We were always short and the leadership looked the other way regarding wieght, pt, uniforms, etc. because they needed bodies. They were good at their job, but they made a less than hooah impression on strangers.

I have met some Marines who've made the switch (came to Army Reserve) for more opportunities (more variety of jobs, assignments, commissions, etc.) who were satisfied with their decision.

urbanjunglist
11-18-2006, 03:01
In your alls opinion, what is the biggest difference between the guard and regular active duty?

LBTRS
11-18-2006, 15:27
Unfortunately they must do this or you would find yourself over there by yourself. They have to get bodies and with ever growing liberal anti-military mindset it's getting harder and harder to find them.

FDC
11-18-2006, 16:12
Originally posted by urbanjunglist
In your alls opinion, what is the biggest difference between the guard and regular active duty?

This is a tough one without sounding like I'm bashing one component or the other.

Other than the obvious differences I think you'll find an overall better trained combat force in the active Army. This can be seen to some extent overseas when certain active units take over an area that a National Guard unit has controlled. The active unit tends to get out of the gate a bit quicker than the average NG unit. One exception to this was the 155th Brigade out of Mississippi, they did a damn good job in SEVERAL tough AOs during their tour.
This is not saying the active unit is better, it is usually better prepared. The guard/reserve unit can come with a different skill set that definitely helps them in their various AOs. Looking at the backgrounds of your guard guys, you'll see cops, carpenters, electricians, etc. If we think that doesn't give them a leg up in certain AOs we are sadly mistaken. Look at Civil Affairs Soldiers. A vast majority of them are Army Reservists who deploy more than active duty guys.
These differences will obviously vary with the mission of the unit. Nobody really cares what an aviation unit does outside the wire, because they normally don't go there. As long as they can fly-who cares whether they are guard or active.
As far as general day to day military standards go, the active side generally has the advantage here. Reason being, they are doing PT/squeezing in a uniforms every day. Reserve components tend to SOMETIMES overlook basic military things such as weight/fitness if that person can do a job well.
I know that was a rambling post, I'll put it into english if you need me to;) .

FDC
11-18-2006, 16:17
Originally posted by LBTRS
Unfortunately they must do this or you would find yourself over there by yourself. They have to get bodies and with ever growing liberal anti-military mindset it's getting harder and harder to find them.
Did ya get lost when you got off the yacht, Chief?:tongueout:


In the navy
Yes, you can sail the seven seas
In the navy
Yes, you can put your mind at ease
In the navy
Come on now, people, make a stand
In the navy, in the navy
Can't you see we need a hand
In the navy
Come on, protect the motherland
In the navy
Come on and join your fellow man
In the navy
Come on people, and make a stand
In the navy, in the navy, in the navy (in the navy)

LBTRS
11-18-2006, 17:46
Originally posted by FDC
Anyone who thinks the Army has "lowered standards for initial enlistment" should be prepared to walk for 3 years in a recruiter's shoes.

I'll second that...going on my 8th year in the recruiting business. Anyone that has done this job will understand how hard it is to find "qualified" applicants for any military service.

DrArmament
02-04-2007, 08:41
The standards will only be lowered if the NCO allows the standards to be lowered. Here at the school house the guide lines are strict to ensure you are not abusing the Soldier but you still can correct a Soldier. I do it on a daily bases.

urbanjunglist
02-22-2007, 20:40
............, its sad but true.

IDC
02-22-2007, 21:16
Age And Treachery Will Always Overcome Youth And Skill

;)

proheromk1
02-24-2007, 19:33
Not to piss on anybody's fence, but unless the policy has changed, the Army only accepts pilots off of the street. Inter-service transfers to the warrant officer program apply to all specialties except for aviation. I am active Coast Guard and have been toiling over the same decision myself for the last 3 years. You can get all of the information and applications on the Army's web site.

army_eod
02-24-2007, 19:48
In WWII we were drafting anybody who could walk up to a certain age (40?).

The Army will now take you up to age 42. Here is the solution: Draft.

Either start the draft (with NO deferments) or continue with the volunteer force. With the volunteer force we are lowering standards and increasing bonuses.

That is a fact, Jack. I have been in the game for 24 years. Yeah, I am an old geezer, but I can kick your ass.

RENEA
02-27-2007, 21:30
If we had a draft this war would have been finished by now.

Originally posted by army_eod
In WWII we were drafting anybody who could walk up to a certain age (40?).

The Army will now take you up to age 42. Here is the solution: Draft.

Either start the draft (with NO deferments) or continue with the volunteer force. With the volunteer force we are lowering standards and increasing bonuses.

That is a fact, Jack. I have been in the game for 24 years. Yeah, I am an old geezer, but I can kick your ass.

JT-Hickman
03-01-2007, 23:29
Urban, let me give you a little something to chew on.

I spent ten years on active duty 86-96 and have been out just over eleven. My body got beat up pretty well during those ten years, as I have arthritis in my feet, knees and shoulders. I have to get epidurals twice a year to numb a nerve just to make life bearable.

I'm also 80 pounds overweight...but I can still run 4 miles without stopping and can still shoot with the best of them...

I'm working out daily so qualify to serve in the Reserves so I can help, if needed.

wtf does it matter what one looks like in uniform if they can make a difference? Would you want me guarding your back... or a draftee?

Goes back to the saying... don't judge a book...

Bravo-Four
03-02-2007, 16:35
I think the Army's height/weight and taping system is all jacked up. Im 6' 200lbs and according to the army, Im a fatbody and need taped. I consistenly pull 270's on my pt tests. I think you should be exempted from being taped if your pt score is higher than 240+passing regardless of how much you weigh, you are obviously in great shape if you are 5'9" 210 and run 13:00 which I have seen more than once.

Some things in the army just make you wonder..."Why..." But, being the good soldier I am, I simply shut up and drive on. Bleh they need to throw me a few stars so I can make some changes ;)

Zenit
03-05-2007, 20:16
I actually got a voice mail from a NG recruiter not so long ago...needless to say, I was surprised, I thought the Prior Service limit was 35 years and I just turned 41. I've been out since 1990...guess I wouldn't be adverse to answering the call if need be, but I was kind of surprised to hear from the guy...I can't imagine what they would need from an old 98G, unless I got looked up on a list re: my first MOS.
:shocked:

As an aside...anyone notice what US Cav & others are getting for those new NIR ACU field jackets? Wow...almost $300.

Sapperstang
03-09-2007, 05:27
My little brother recently graduated basic. I went and attended. I was disgusted by what I saw. Discipline has slipped among other things. Some of the stuff he has told me that goes on is downright pathetic. He wishes it was the other way around. I told him I doubt it will be that way at the unit level. Amazes me how the Army has changed in the three years I've been out.

ssgarmy
03-11-2007, 18:16
I guess I will add my $.02, For what its worth.
First off, urbanjunglist, I dont Know if you have ever served, and if you have, Thank you for your service. However, you should really work on your grammer and spelling because as it stands now, based on your posts', your GT score on the ASVAB would not be high enough to qualify you to serve in the Army. You keep blasting soldiers based on your perceptions of what you see and hear? Ok, I can't argue with that, as your perception is your own.
I joined the Army in 1988, I served 3 years on Active Duty and 16 in the Reserve. For the last 4 years I was a Platoon Sergeant of a Combat Engineer Sapper (Demo) Platoon. Last Year I was asked to and accepted an assignment as a Retention NCO in the AGR Program (Active Guard and Reserve)My job now, since Nov., is to Retain Soldiers. I do not Recruit Soldiers but I do Help Recruiters with leads if I get one.
While a Plt. Sgt. The soldiers that were coming out of Basic from Ft. Leonard Wood were as straight and disiplined as I was straight out. The soldiers still "lockup" when an NCO passes them in the halls of a Reserve Center for the first few months after returning. They also still have the same sense of duty as when I was a recruit, At least until they run into and start to know some of the guys who have been around for awhile. After a few months they do loosen up some, but how much is contingent upon his leaders, If the NCO Corp gets lax then the troops do as well.
In my unit and the Unit I currently support I can tell you this is not the case. Soldiers are still Soldiers.
I know there are "bad" units and Worse yet NCO' s and Officers out there. Trust me I transfer Soldiers weekly out of bad units and into good units. The Mission? Yes there is a mission to retain "GOOD" soldiers. Every week I write at least 2 Exit Counselings on Soldiers who Fail to Meet the Standard. Then we put them out, period.
What I can tell you is this; Soldiers who train and accept the challenge of Combat Arms MOS's still come out of Basic with the Disipline and sense of Honor that would make our forfather's proud. Is it as tough as theirs'? I dont know, but it is still tough. I can tell you that Basic trainees I have come in contact with from Non- Combat Arms Basic is a problem and I have dealt with many soldiers and their "Flawed Mindset", Again It is the NCO's Job to make them understand what it means to be a Soldier.

A note that was mentioned above by a brother Sapper, I agree the army's HT/ WT standard if very flawed I have several Soldiers who are your same size and are 270+ PT studs. The Army still considers them Fatboys?????? It is very much a screwed up system.

My biggest problem with this post is that it sounds exactly like the "BAD MOUTH" Soldier croud I see day in and day out in every unit. These are the group of guys who are always hanging out bad mouthing everything, F-this, F-That, why the hell are they making us do this *****. These are same guys who never work, never pass their PT test, Never show up at Drill and if they do, they are Late. I always tell my new guys, Stay away from the "Bad Mouths", they will drag you down and make you hate your job. I use motivation and fun in training. Everything from Paintball to Pugo sticks to co-ordinating with the Local PD for Force on Force Training.
Moral is what you make of it, and Bad Mouthing my Soliders and lumping all soldiers together based on your perception is BS. If you dont like My Army, then Join up or Re Enlist, earn your stripes and Change it. If your not willing, Shut up and enjoy your Freedom.

chuck
SFC USAR

cdurand
03-12-2007, 20:18
If the bar is being lowered on recruits what would be the answer? Raising pay/better benefits?

Possibly.. but I would like to mention that I have work in two very large companies.. one with 300,000 employees and my current employer with just under 100,000.. and we have ****birds in both organizations the get paid plenty and have great benefits.

My point is there are losers every where. It's just the way it is.

I think the Army, in the last decade or so, had to lower its standards to compete with the good jobs during the dot.com days. Now they probably are having trouble attracting people because of Iraq and repeat deployments.

I'd say the solution needs to come from the top down. From what I can tell the top leaders are all afraid to make bad decisions so instead they make no decisions. It's all left up to the guys in the field, NCOS, to call the shots and get the job done.

Tangodown0311
05-11-2010, 18:27
Army relaxing standards?? You don't say...
http://i43.tinypic.com/106j22w.jpg

^Saw that guy @ Al Asad.

Airborne12b
05-16-2010, 22:21
I'll be the 1st to admit the quality of new Soldiers has gone downhill since I came in in 92. While I'm sure every generation of Soldiers looks at the new guys, and thinks "are we scraping the bottom of the barrel?", I believe the mean quality of new Soldiers has slipped.
I truthfully don't feel it's a case of the Army "lowering standards", I think it's a case of the Army adjusting to the current pool of recruits. Do I agree with it? In most cases NO, but it really isn't that bad.
You may see a whole bunch of stats about letting criminals in. Some of that is society's fault by charging kids for every stupid thing under the sun. Also, some of it is technology. A recruit used to be able to get away with concealing law violations as long as his job didn't require a clearance. Now the ENTNAC comes back within 48 hours, and there is no hiding the law violation. Recruiters are being forced to list all the violations, and run moral waivers. hence the appearance we allow more criminals in.
As far as age goes, I do believe the Army is adjusting to the market. I don't like it. I know there are quite a few guys in their late 30s that would be better Soldiers than ANY punk kid. I still believe the Army is a young man's game.
Body fat/weight standards are pretty cut and dry for anyone going through MEPS. Weight issues in the unit is a failure on the individual, and the unit's leadership. All it takes is a little PT, or a little paperwork to fix a weight problem. The individual fails by gaining the weight. The leadership fails by not PTing/dieting the crap out of the offender. The unit also fails by not thoroughly documenting the weight failures, and then kicking them out. Many units do this well, some don't.
Anyone who thinks the Army has "lowered standards for initial enlistment" should review AR 601-210. It's not that easy to squeeze someone into the "fully qualified" category according to that reg. Anyone who thinks the Army has "lowered standards for initial enlistment" should be prepared to walk for 3 years in a recruiter's shoes.


Heard that! 79R is by far the single most thankless most crapped on MOS in existence. Constant harassing from your station commander about mission, God forbid you bring someone on the floor that fails piss or blows tape. I actually had shorter days that were more stress free invading Iraq than I did on an average day as a recruiter.

Airborne12b
05-16-2010, 22:22
Army relaxing standards?? You don't say...
http://i43.tinypic.com/106j22w.jpg

^Saw that guy @ Al Asad.


Effing ridiculous...

sdrnavy
05-16-2010, 22:26
A soldier is a patriot ! If he cannot keep up with the best, then he has your back ! It is in his heart , he wants to protect his country. I'd rather have an old soldier to my back, than a young punk at my front ! I know what the old soldier is thinking !