Professional Soldiers ®

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)
-   180A (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=78)
-   -   Why Lieutenent to Warrant (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1777)

Kyobanim 05-13-2004 12:37

Why Lieutenent to Warrant
 
Hope this is the right place to ask this.

Why did the Army change to a WO in the team and drop the 1st LT? And is there a certain level of WO, as in 1,2,3, or 4 to hold the 180A position?

Airbornelawyer 05-13-2004 14:28

Re: Why Lieutenent to Warrant
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Kyobanim
Hope this is the right place to ask this.

Why did the Army change to a WO in the team and drop the 1st LT? And is there a certain level of WO, as in 1,2,3, or 4 to hold the 180A position?

180A isn't a position. The position on the ODA is Assistant Detachment Commander. By reg, its normally a WO1/CW2 position, but there is no specified requirement.

Other positions for 180As include Company Operations Warrant Officer, Battalion Ops WO, Group Ops WO and Group Intel WO. These are normally CW3 and up.

GreenSalsa 05-13-2004 18:39

The biggest reason they tell me is...
 
Continuity. The current assignment system we have moves CPTs and MSGs way too fast in my opinion. We are actually lucky to keep them for 24 months at the ODA level. The Army has decided to put Warrant Officers on the detachment to slow down leadership rollover. A 180A is not supposed to be eligible for promotion for CW3 if he doesn’t have 60 months on time as an ADC on an ODA. I am expected and encouraged to stay on the same detachment for 5-6 years to bring some sort of stability to the detachment. For the record, I am on my 3rd Detachment Commander and 3rd Team Sergeant (not to mention my 4th Company Commander) I have been on this detachment for only a little over 42 months. By keeping someone like me on a detachment we don’t “hurt” traditional officer careers by keeping them too long at one assignment. When I make CW3 I will be “asked” (read forced) to take an ODB or Battalion position, possibly a SWC assignment.

Kyobanim 05-13-2004 19:36

Thanks for the answers.

So does the WO stay on a team longer than anyone else? I would think the NCOs would stay longer on a team also for the same reason.

GreenSalsa 05-14-2004 18:19

Generally speaking...
 
Warrant Officers stay on a detachment longer than the NCOs.

scot055 11-07-2007 18:58

how long does some body have to stay a SF NCO to become a Warrant Officer and do that person have to go back though the Q-course?

The Reaper 11-07-2007 19:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by scot055 (Post 187996)
how long does some body have to stay a SF NCO to become a Warrant Officer and do that person have to go back though the Q-course?

Scot:

Fill out your profile and learn use the Search button.

That is basic info that has already been covered repeatedly.

TR

troy2k 04-13-2008 02:00

Excellent Historical Document
 
http://www.usawoa.org/WOHERITAGE/Hist_SF_WO.pdf

Explains a lot, including the surprising officer who had a lot to do with the initial process.

Jack Moroney (RIP) 04-13-2008 05:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by troy2k (Post 206357)
http://www.usawoa.org/WOHERITAGE/Hist_SF_WO.pdf

Explains a lot, including the surprising officer who had a lot to do with the initial process.


There were a bunch of us at the time bantering this around with "Scotty" and the pros and cons got very interesting one major one was that if we could keep LTs we could "grow" better Detachment CDRs, another being that if we could send the LT back to a conventional assignment in the combat arms he would come back better able to understand not only how mother army worked but how to function as that force multiplier when his team became the nucleus for a BN of indig.

kgoerz 04-13-2008 06:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenSalsa (Post 20488)
Warrant Officers stay on a detachment longer than the NCOs.

How so? I never saw this. There is the inevitable SWC Tour for NCO'S. But how many Warrants do time at BN and GRP.
Once they replaced Lt's with WO. Instead of getting a Team leader with a couple of years Team experience you got one with no experience. To me the WO program was one of the worst Team organization decisions ever made.

SFS0AVN 04-13-2008 09:13

In order to get promoted to the higher CWO grades, he must spend time at Bn, Gp and SFCOM.

lksteve 04-13-2008 09:41

The missive from the WOA got my heart started.

Quote:

There were also a disproportionately large number of officers who had not
yet completed college, indicating challenging or limited future careers.
As one of those unfortunate souls, I have to argue the contrary...my career prospects were so limited that the Army sent me to graduate school in my 19th year of service...I was not that exceptional among SF NCOs who attended OCS...a bunch of us wound up with fully-funded graduate degrees...when I decided to retire, SF Branch had indicated an interest to sending me to post-graduate training well after I was retirement eligible...maybe they thought if they kept me in school, I could be kept out of trouble...:eek:

Before the 48 graduate program was detached from JFKIMA, quite a few former SF NCOs attended...once again, the names escape me...

Granted, this happened after SF had stood up as a branch, but I recall several men of the earlier era that had gone down this path...(I can see faces, but names escape me right now, Colonel Howard being one of them, but he was in a category all his own.)

Quote:

There were disproportionately few
Military Academy graduates.
Really? When I think back to my time in SF as an NCO, I'd say they were well represented on A-teams...not many came back as field grade officers, however. And anyway, so what? How many USMA graduates server in AG assignments...? How many wind up commanding HHC, USAG and Band? That comment is ludicrous and irrelevant in my opinion.

In addressing the shortages of qualified officers in SF, the biggest sticking points were the opportunities for advancement posed by more than one assignment in SF...one tour was okay, but two tended to be viewed by Big Army as problematic...In my opinion, one thing that held back motivated SF NCOs from going to OCS before the advent of the SFWO was the unlikely possiblity of being able to continue serving in SF after commissioning. Richard and I were able to manage after commissioning (Richard went right to 7th SFGA after OCS, I did a one year indenture in the 509th before going to Toelz). Of the other three or four (including one former team mate), none of them made it to SF after commissioning (although two of them went to flight school).

Quote:

The Center indicated little interest in the subject, posed no obstructions, and provided little
support beyond use of the unoccupied office.
I find this comment somewhat curious, as well. In 1981, Colonel Maracek, along with several 48 types from JFK (PSYOP, CA, Attache types, not SF) came to BT with a canine-equestrian presentation regarding the future of SF officer career management activities, things in the works. And, of course the 48 guy threw in his opinion about how uneducated, uncultured, former SF NCOs were really dragging the 48 career field threw the mud and that something needed to be done about that. (The battalion XO kept his arm across my back as that BS was being propogated, but Paul E, the MFF team leader, another one of the unclean, spoke for me)...anyway, Colonel M. showed us that in a few years time, their would be three SF "divisions" (SWC, SF Command and an SO Support Command) and that the creation of three MG level commands would make life so much better and allow some of us to make SF our primary means of earning a living. The specialty designation for officers was going to be 11X, or at least that was what was put forward then (yes, I remember it like it was yesterday)...that would allow the longhairs in the 48 field to be untainted by the infidels like Paul and me...

I should have read this thread before I had my coffee...I'm awake now...:munchin

GreenSalsa 04-13-2008 10:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgoerz (Post 206362)
How so? I never saw this. There is the inevitable SWC Tour for NCO'S. But how many Warrants do time at BN and GRP.

Today (at least when I finished the course in 2000), we were expected to do 5-7 years as a Assistant Detachment Commander or Detachment Commander. During my 5 + years (same detachment) I saw, 4 Team Sergeants and 4 Detachment Commanders (not including the 9 months I was in Command) "cycle" through.

In addition there was not a single NCO that stayed the entire time I was there--add that to the 7 + years I served as an SF Medic (all served at the team level, except for 14 months as a battalion medic) I easily logged over 11-12 years on a detachment.

Furthermore, senior NCO positions are now managed just like officer positions (18-24 months) and then they are rotated out--the only exception are Warrant Officers. We are encouraged and expected to stay longer on the detachment.

All WO positions at BN and GP are CW3/4/5 billets, and should be manned accordingly. The same holds true for SWC and elsewhere--there are exceptions based off of injury or family situations.

one-zero 04-13-2008 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenSalsa (Post 206391)
...Furthermore, senior NCO positions are now managed just like officer positions (18-24 months) and then they are rotated out--the only exception are Warrant Officers...

RGR - I made E8 list in secondary and was notified I was approved for WOC in the same time period. CSM made a call to me in Panama asking what I wanted to do so they could unscrew it with perscom.
Hmmm, 9 more years team time I ended up with as a WO versus a likely 2-3 years max as a SNCO then off to Bn S3, 1sgt, etc. after that ...well everyone has their reasons and you can't stay on a team forever, but for me leaving team level (whether ODA or 'other') allowed me to make the decision to retire - But by going WO it allowed me to max team time out as well as give back to newer guys coming into the system, both fellow NCOs and Officers. No ticket punching and a great opportunity to look back on service as both an SF NCO serving on a team as well as an SFWO commanding one...the only good deal left after Tm Sgts and Det Cdrs were getting pushed up after 24 months. Heck my first Det CDR had 4 yrs team time and there were Tm sgts with several years in position as well. Lots of experience maintained that way, but it just ceased to be a viable option and WO was supposed to provide continuity...as with all best laid plans we know it doesn't always work out that way.

Best regards,
1-0

JFW 08-04-2008 20:16

WO Progression
 
Gents,

1. Let me see if I can expand a bit more on the WO Program with my experience. I joined the Army in 81. Went to SF School in 1984. Did team time in 7th/1st GP and SWC, then went into the WO Program as an E-7 with three SF Mos's and more than six years of team time.

2. As a WO, stayed on the same ODA for 4 years straight and then went to the B-Tm. Then it was off to JRTC for two yrs.

3. Then back to a B-Tm after JRTC as a CW3 and then after a year of that, back down to a freefall team for 2 more yrs.

4. Made the CW4 list and then it was up to BN. After that, I did a Joint tour at JIATF and then to 1st SWTG(A).

5. Now back to a GP to one of the two CW5s (Grp Ops WO).

So, what I am saying is that a WO1-CW3 can stay on a team for a long time and can do a B-Tm tour once or even twice. Typically the Bn WO is a CW4. There are a few Joint assignemnets out there and also a handful of slots at SWC and the other Commands (CW3-CW5). Now we can have two CW5s at the Group level....one in the S-3 shop as the Grp Ops WO and then the Command Chief Warrant Officer of the Group. Or you can stay in one Grp for the whole time as a WO.....but I am not sure if that would be a good thing......

I have been in for 27yrs and can now stay in for 40 yrs of WO Service or age 62(I am 44 now so I guess it will be the 40 yrs of WO service if I decide to stay)......so, from my point of view, the WO program is a success and will be around for a long time. Heck, I have even seen a CW5 work at the company level while in the sandbox for awhile.......so you definetly get the bang for a buck when it comes to a WO verses a Lt (an O)....just some words for thought.....be safe out there and always take care of your SOF Brothers.......


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:32.


Copyright 2004-2019 by Professional Soldiers ®