|
| |
Is MOS 918B Overextended?
Follow the controversy
Note : E-mails are in REVERSE chronological order
First I ask that all 918Bs assigned to Signal BDEs and
Commands please share this information with their commanders. Have your
commanders bring this to the attention of SIGNAL COMMAND here at Fort Gordon
through their commissioned channels.
Don,
I share your concerns, Yes WO1 Mitchell brought this
situation to my attention and I got the same reply from Redstone that he gave
you. That he will be ahead of his peers when promoted to 918E CW4.
What is the percentage of WO1s make CW3 let alone CW4? I do not feel that
Proponent realizes the scope or broadness of our MOS (918B). It doesn't matter
that this soldier and the others are being set up for failure and 918B will be
given a Black eye. Thank you for your concerns. Maybe the voice of a
senior CW5 918B will be heard a little louder than a Junior CW4.
Ed, Charles, or Jim,
Please insure you forward this to other senior CW5 and CW5 918Bs
as I don't have their Email addresses. I would have blast it out to
eWarrants myself but have learned my lesson.
CW5 Hewitt,
I got his Email today and think it lends credence to what I am
about to say. I firmly believe a mistake was made when SIGNAL did not keep
the 918B positions located in the Tactical SIGNAL BNs. SIGNAL kept all the
Enlisted MOSs that maintained SIGNAL unique equipment. 29V/M became 31P,
29Y became 31S, some 35N and 35E who either had the MSE ASI or the HF single
channel system AN/TSC-122 ASI became 31F. Only 256A ASI 3E (Strategic Satellite)
was maintained by SIGNAL and coded 250N ASI 3E.
The Reason the 256A ASI 3E was maintained by SIGNAL is the
Strategic Satellite equipment and repairman were SIGNAL unique. The same
holds true for the 918B currently in a Tactical SIGNAL BNs and BDEs. All
the Equipment repaired there is SIGNAL unique. The enlisted repairman for
Tactical SIGNAL BNs are MOS 31P, 31S, and 31F, with a few 35E for COMSEC.
All these Operator Maintainers work for the 918B and repair the SIGNAL unique
equipment in MSE and EAC SIG BNs. None of the MOSs other than 35E are feeders to
MOS 918B. 35E is such a large MOS that the chance of one of those soldiers
having SIGNAL BN experience is remote. The SINCGARS and non SIGNAL unique
equipment is evacuated to either DS or GS Ordnance units for repair. The
Commanders who have come to expect a SIGNAL Equipment expert are getting
everything from AVIONICS, TMDE, Radar, Ground Communications (non Signal Radios
Wire Computers and Faxes) to a Special Electronic Devices Expert AND SOON
MISSILE. And If they are lucky these sharp guys or gals can learn SIGNAL systems
in six months or so. The best SIGNAL 918Bs are ones coming from 31P &
31S and these soldiers currently need a waiver to become a 918B.
This situation will be compounded 1 OCT when MOS 918D
(Missile) and 918B merger at CW4 to 918E. The senior 918B (918E) positions
at SIGNAL BDEs and SIGNAL Commands will be filled by an individual that may have
never been assigned to a SIGNAL unit, this is what happened to CW5 Chizmar
(former 918A) at 93rd SIG BDE. Of the 235 current positions for 918B (918E
at CW4 & CW5 1 OCT 02) only 68 belong to SIGNAL Commands, BDEs, and BNs.
918B feeder MOSs
35B LCSS Repairer
35C Radar Repairer
35D Air traffic Control
35E Radio COMSEC repairer
35F Special Electronic Device Repairer
35H TMDE Repairer
35J Computer systems repairer
35L Avionics Equipment Repairer
35N Wire Systems Repairer
35R Avionics System Repairer
35Y IFTE Repairer
39B Automatic Test Equipment repairer
35W Communications Chief Caper MOS at E7 for all of the above.
31S and 31P with waver
I propose that the MOS 256A be reinstated and called Signal
Systems Warrant Officer or Signal Systems Technician leave out the word
Maintenance I.E. Ordnance.
The MOS would consist of the 68 or so 918B positions in the
Tactical SIGNAL Units (see attached spread sheet I may have missed one or two)
and the 250N 3E Strategic Satellite Warrant Officers. This would also eliminate
the problem you are having with managing 250N 3E as all Signal Systems both
Tactical and Strategic are basically the same and a strong Logistical background
is the key. This would also give the Diversity of assignments for the new
MOS and training could key on Signal Systems, both MSE and EAC in the Basic
course and of course the old tried and true LOG. The Strategic Satellite
slots could be coded CW3 and taught thoroughly during the Advanced course.
256A feeder MOSs
31S Satellite Communications Operator-Maintainer
31P Microwave Communications Systems Operator-Maintainer
31F Network Switching Systems Operator-Maintainer with
maintenance shop experience
31R Multichannel Transmission Systems Operator-Maintainer with
maintenance shop experience
31E Radio COMSEC repairer with Signal BN experience
As a side note even if this does not occur, and we all know
that it should, the 35W E7 slot in the tactical SIG BNs should be converted to
31P OR 31S. They do not get any Signal Systems training throughout their entire
career and are then thrust into a SIG BN. They don't have the foggiest
idea of what makes up a SIGNAL System. At least the WO1 918B gets three
weeks of Multichannel in WOBC.
Thanks,
William M. Wade
CW4, USA
Chief, Warrant Officer Division
(706)791-4821
DSN 780-4821
fax 780-4574
-----Original Message-----
From: Hurst, Donald W. Jr. CW5
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 8:47 AM
To: richard.storie@redstone.army.mil;
john.jones@usarec.army.mil;
charles.etheridge@redstone.army.mil; james.jackson@redstone.army.mil
Cc: Chapin, Roger W. CW4; Corvington, Serge CW4
Subject: Assessment of 27E's into
918B
Gentlemen
Last week I had the opportunity to speak directly with WO1 Harold
C. Mitchell, (last 4 SSN) 9460, regarding his accession into the 918B MOS. He
verified all facts stated in the previous emails (included below). I further
talked to him about the other two individuals that were mentioned by CW4 Chapin.
SSG John A. Winters and SSG Fredrick D. Johnson both 27E's and selected on
the March 2001 board. Neither, according to Mitchell, applied for 918B.
The following statement, "Don't worry, you will be far
ahead of the other 918B's when you merge into a 918E", was reportedly made
by CW5 Jim Jackson at Redstone. This statement has NOT been verified with CW5
Jackson. I find this very difficult to believe since this merge will not occur
until his promotion to CW4 (some 12-14 years after appointment). Technology
changes too rapidly to make this anywhere near valid. I also ran a copy of his
schooling at the V.A. web site and did not find any additional qualifications
for 918B. Although, this does not mean that he may have some unknown background
that "uniquely qualifies" him for both the 918B or the 918D MOS. I
spent more than 2 hours with him and did not find an answer to this question of
qualification. I also asked WO1 Mitchell if he had brought his circumstances up
to anyone at Ft. Gordon to which he replied CW4 Bill Wade.
Once again, that is his statement and has NOT been verified with CW4 Wade.
I would like to point out that I did find WO1 Mitchell
to be a highly motivated young officer who was not complaining. He simply is
finding himself overwhelmed and way beyond his depth, understandably so.
Motivation is not the problem, experience and background are the problems.
What is stated in this letter are MY concerns.
What bothers me most in this situation, and future situations
that might occur with Johnson and Winters, is that we put them out there in a
"one deep unit" without the background for success. This type of
selection hurts unit mission readiness and lowers the unit commanders opinion of
not only the warrants in the 918B MOS, but his opinion of the entire Warrant
Corps. In addition, 918Bs are actively out there trying to recruit
qualified applicants who hold the required prerequisite MOS's and have to
explain these anomalies. Does three in a 12 month period show a trend or an
anomaly? The soldiers out there are acutely aware when these things happen and
it does not help our recruitment efforts.
Gentlemen, at his level it is NOT a
matter of administrative competence and management, the WO1, CW2 and CW3s out
here have got to have a background of experience and first hand knowledge
to be successful. "If I (commander) wanted just a manager and administrator
in my CE maintenance shop I (commander) will get a lieutenant, I don't need a
warrant", this from a senior officer in Theater.
With the success and careers of commanders hanging in the
balance, not to mention the readiness of OUR Army and nation, please join me in
taking a second look at our accession prospects. It is not fair to our soldiers,
new warrants, commanders or our Army to send them out into the active Army
population without the tools for success. The biggest one of these being a
background of experience in the MOS field.
Donald W. Hurst, Jr.
CW5, USA
Chief of Maintenance, 1st Signal Brigade
(The Senior 918B in Korea)
<<FW: Warrant Officer feeder MOS>>
<<RE: Warrant Officer feeder MOS>>
-----Original Message-----
From: Chapin, Roger W. CW4 [ChapinR@usfk.korea.army.mil]
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 4:20 AM
To: Jones, John R CW5 USAREC
Cc: 'Storie, Richard L CW5 OMMCS'
Subject: Warrant Officer feeder MOS
CW5 Jones,
The Warrant Officer's name is Mitchell, Harold C., W01, last four
9460,
ADOR 20000921.
CW4 Chapin
Chapinr@usfk.korea.army.mil
-----Original Message-----
From: Jones, John R CW5 USAREC [John.Jones@usarec.army.mil]
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 7:32 AM
To: richard.storie@redstone.army.mil
Cc: Duquette, Ronald G. CW3 USAREC; Meyer, Mark A CW3 USAREC;
Smiley, Garett CW2 USAREC; Murphy, Stella M Ms. USAREC;
Howell, Joe L. Mr. USAREC; ChapinR@usfk.korea.army.mil
Subject: FW: Warrant Officer feeder MOS
Rick-
Can you shed any light on this situation? Without a
name or grade, I can't go back and check if the soldier was boarded in the wrong
MOS, if that is what happened. Sounds like this is something that you may
have influenced from your end.
-----Original Message-----
From: Duquette, Ronald G. CW3 USAREC
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 11:21 PM
To: Jones, John R CW5 USAREC
Subject: FW: Warrant Officer feeder MOS
I think this is one for you to answer. :-)
CW3 Ronald G. Duquette
Chief, Special Missions Recruiting
U.S. Army Recruiting Command
(502) 626-0716 or DSN 536-0716
Visit our Web site at: http://www.usarec.army.mil/hq/warrant/index.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: Chapin, Roger W. CW4 [ChapinR@usfk.korea.army.mil]
Sent: May 08, 2001 10:14 PM
To: Ronald.Duquette@usarec.army.mil
Subject: Warrant Officer feeder MOS
CW3 Duquette,
We have received a Warrant Officer in MOS 918B who held an
enlisted MOS of 27E. 27E is not a feeder MOS for 918B. I realize
that other experience can sometimes substitute for MOS training so I spoke with
the Officer and was told that he did not even apply for 918B or even mention the
MOS on his application. He applied for 918D and has no other experience to
otherwise qualify for 918B. Additionally, he told me he was aware of at
least two other soldiers that are in the same situation. He also informed
me that he mentioned this to senior warrant officers at Redstone and was
told that since 918B and 918D merge at the senior warrant officer grades (918E)
that he shouldn't worry about it, that while he may struggle at first in the
long run he will have an advantage over the other 918Bs once they merge into
918E. If that is the case why have two MOSs at all, just make
everyone a 918x and
be done with it. But I digress, my questions are how did this, or how
could this happen? And who is the proper person to address my concerns
to?
Roger W. Chapin
CW4, USA
DLOG, 1st Sig Bde
email: chapinr@usfk.korea.army.mil
DSN FAX: (315) 723-4966
DSN: (315) 723-4985 |
