# Sec Def wants civilians "laterally" entered as O's



## RackMaster (Jun 20, 2016)

This sounds like a huge crock of shit.  Is there not already senior civilian positions?  Why the need to put them in uniform and give them a commission if not to drive policy from within.  




> *Sec Def wants civilians to be “laterally” entered into military as high ranking officers*
> By Andy Wolf|June 20th, 2016|Military News|0 Comments
> 
> *Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!*
> ...


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 20, 2016)

_Quoted from above - 
 Meanwhile, the Marine Corps seems to be showing the most resistance.  _

Saw this yesterday on Twitter - need to track down the actual article...


----------



## DA SWO (Jun 20, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> _Quoted from above -
> Meanwhile, the Marine Corps seems to be showing the most resistance.  _
> 
> Saw this yesterday on Twitter - need to track down the actual article...


Army Times?

Problem is you will have Field Grade Officer's functioning as Lt's.

I also see DoD paying through the ass as these guys/gals do a 4 year tour in Acquisitions, then head back to the companies to "invent" new technologies, ignoring the fact that these technologies are owned by another company.


----------



## Marine0311 (Jun 20, 2016)

No.


----------



## TLDR20 (Jun 20, 2016)

It would work for Medical officers. No reason it wouldn't. They aren't line officers anyways.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 20, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> It would work for Medical officers. No reason it wouldn't. They aren't line officers anyways.



Wasn't that the overall premise of MASH?  Docs drafted out of their practices, given rank, and sent to Korea.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 20, 2016)

The Navy does this, actually quite a bit.  Mostly the medical field (docs, nurses, dentists, etc) and JAG, but I saw intel, civil engineer corps, and supply officer enter at higher grade.  Of course, some of those are staff O's and some are Restricted Line Officers, so the only thing they could command would be a shore establishment of their given specialty.


----------



## AWP (Jun 20, 2016)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Wasn't that the overall premise of MASH?  Docs drafted out of their practices, given rank, and sent to Korea.



We still do that. Doc's and lawyers (probably other specialties) go through a gentleman's course and are frocked as Captains.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 20, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> We still do that. Doc's and lawyers (probably other specialties) go through a gentleman's course and are frocked as Captains.



In the Navy for active it's Officer Development School, in the reserve it's Direct Commission Officer school; either way, it's knife-and-fork school at a crawling speed.  Generally a cake walk for anyone, for Mustangs it's about as easy a few weeks as you can get.


----------



## Totentanz (Jun 20, 2016)

Just my SWAG: Army's standing up their own Cyber Branch and have had VTIP messages out for a while now for accessions into the branch.  I'm not sure where the other services stand on this, but if they don't have organic talent, and they can't attract talent on O-1 pay, this may be (for right or for wrong) their answer...


----------



## DocIllinois (Jun 20, 2016)

From a combat arms perspective, as long as LTC NetworkArchitect doesn't imagine he can take charge of a military operation he might somehow be a part of, or in the vicinity of, I don't object to using SMEs with limited commissions.


----------



## Gunz (Jun 20, 2016)

And characteristically, the Marines resist all the bullshit innovations that come out of DoD and then reluctantly have to go along with them because they have no other choice. Is it a "face" thing?


----------



## Gunz (Jun 20, 2016)

DocIllinois said:


> From a combat arms perspective, as long as LTC NetworkArchitect doesn't imagine he can take charge of a military operation he might somehow be a part of, or in the vicinity of, I don't object to using SMEs with limited commissions.



I don't think it's a bad idea unless we go full retard Civil War politically appointed infantry officers. :wall::wall::wall:


----------



## policemedic (Jun 20, 2016)

DocIllinois said:


> From a combat arms perspective, as long as LTC NetworkArchitect doesn't imagine he can take charge of a military operation he might somehow be a part of, or in the vicinity of, I don't object to using SMEs with limited commissions.



I thought those people were called Warrant Officers.  Of course, Civil Affairs created a SME officer billet that has no command responsibility (I was actually considering it for a bit) so this wouldn't be groundbreaking.

The problem that I see is that even new college graduates command higher salaries than O3s and O4s, depending on time in service...and these kids get it right out of the gate.  WO pay probably wouldn't attract them, and I wonder if regular officer pay would either unless they are constitutionally predisposed to serving their country.  But if that were the case they probably would have earned their IT/IS degrees through ROTC.

It's a conundrum.


----------



## Totentanz (Jun 20, 2016)

policemedic said:


> I thought those people were called Warrant Officers.  Of course, Civil Affairs created a SME officer billet that has no command responsibility (I was actually considering it for a bit) so this wouldn't be groundbreaking.
> 
> The problem that I see is that even new college graduates command higher salaries than O3s and O4s, depending on time in service...and these kids get it right out of the gate.  WO pay probably wouldn't attract them, and I wonder if regular officer pay would either unless they are constitutionally predisposed to serving their country.  But if that were the case they probably would have earned their IT/IS degrees through ROTC.
> 
> It's a conundrum.



Warrant was my first thought as well, but you'd have a hell of a time stretching a bonus from WO1 pay up to the O4-O6 levels they're talking about. 

The other part is effectively managing the skills that people are arriving with... :wall:


----------



## compforce (Jun 20, 2016)

There are also non-leadership officer MOS'  For example, FA-53 is an IT Officer that is not eligible to hold a command.  They can hold a Leadership position within their area (S/J/G-6), but not a command.

The problem that they are finding out now is that they stopped growing their own people in the technical fields, lost the skillsets because they outsourced to contractors and now do not have the intrinsic ability to reestablish the expertise internally.  Civvie side we would say that they lost their institutional knowledge.  They are absolutely correct when they say it would take decades to grow their own (competent) O's in these fields.

Personally, I have the skillset they are looking for and would be willing to get back in with the lateral promotion.  The main reason I got out is that the pay disparity was killing me financially with the deployments.  Even as a junior IT guy (which I am not), the difference between civilian pay and Army pay is that the military pay is less than half the starting salary in the equivalent job.  As an O-5/O-6 I'd make enough on deployments to be able to pay the bills, not much more...but I'd finish out my career and retire.


----------



## Dame (Jun 20, 2016)

compforce said:


> There are also non-leadership officer MOS'  For example, FA-53 is an IT Officer that is not eligible to hold a command.  They can hold a Leadership position within their area (S/J/G-6), but not a command.
> 
> The problem that they are finding out now is that they stopped growing their own people in the technical fields, lost the skillsets because they outsourced to contractors and now do not have the intrinsic ability to reestablish the expertise internally.  Civvie side we would say that they lost their institutional knowledge.  They are absolutely correct when they say it would take decades to grow their own (competent) O's in these fields.
> 
> Personally, I have the skillset they are looking for and would be willing to get back in with the lateral promotion.  The main reason I got out is that the pay disparity was killing me financially with the deployments.  Even as a junior IT guy (which I am not), the difference between civilian pay and Army pay is that the military pay is less than half the starting salary in the equivalent job.  As an O-5/O-6 I'd make enough on deployments to be able to pay the bills, not much more...but I'd finish out my career and retire.


Not trying to be a smartass, but wouldn't they disqualify us (meaning you and me both) based on age?


----------



## compforce (Jun 20, 2016)

I'm still young enough to reup.  They take your service off of your age to determine eligibility.  I'm 47 with 12 years service so for enlistment purposes I'm still 35 until my next birthday.


----------



## Dame (Jun 20, 2016)

compforce said:


> I'm still young enough to reup.  They take your service off of your age to determine eligibility.  I'm 47 with 12 years service so for enlistment purposes I'm still 35 until my next birthday.


Lordy I hate you right now.


----------



## policemedic (Jun 20, 2016)

Just spitballing but if they're willing to trade rank for technical expertise age waivers may be possible.


----------



## Etype (Jun 21, 2016)

compforce said:


> I'm still young enough to reup.  They take your service off of your age to determine eligibility.  I'm 47 with 12 years service so for enlistment purposes I'm still 35 until my next birthday.





Dame said:


> Lordy I hate you right now.


Cool, I'm still 18!


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jun 21, 2016)

*sits over here with a whisky, scowl, and an unusable 27 due to the RE4.....*


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 21, 2016)

policemedic said:


> Just spitballing but if they're willing to trade rank for technical expertise age waivers may be possible.



They do.  The waiver basically says "you ain't seeing retirement."


----------



## Florida173 (Jun 21, 2016)

I believe some would hit their MRD too soon to be valuable


----------



## 104TN (Jun 21, 2016)

Can't see this attracting the kind of talent that's being advertised as needed.

I know mediocre generalist Systems and Network Engineers pulling down O-7/O-8 pay with the boon of choosing their own adventure every day.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 21, 2016)

Hmmm, I have no problem with prior service coming back in as and officer at field grade level, especially when they possess education or special skills and life experiences fitting to the level of rank.

I completely disagree (line officer or not) with someone walking in off the street as anything other than a cadet or PVT. Honestly, I've always felt everyone should serve minimum of 24mths enlisted and achieve E4 prior to being admitted to an academy or ROTC program. 

The last thing the Army needs is more problematic leadership in the Officer corps. 

$.02


----------



## Gunz (Jun 21, 2016)

rick said:


> Can't see this attracting the kind of talent that's being advertised as needed.
> 
> I know mediocre generalist Systems and Network Engineers pulling down O-7/O-8 pay with the boon of choosing their own adventure every day.




With the apparent reluctance of most Americans to serve their country, it'll boil down to salaries/benefits...because if the military incentives aren't comparable to the private sector, you'll end up with 2nd team candidates. And experts established in their careers tend to have homes, families, etc and are rooted.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 21, 2016)

Most of the people who join "these" types of jobs aren't doing it to reach a command level.  And those who do end up going through command school, staff school, all sorts of school to put them in that position.

I can't speak to the non-medical/JAG fields, but I don't know how many health care professionals or attorneys have enough love of country and desire to serve to enter as an O1.  And many of the others who come in with graduate degrees and skill expertise shouldn't have to enter as O1.


----------



## CDG (Jun 25, 2016)

This could be a great program if done right, and the military could use some SMEs of the caliber being discussed.  I think it's ludicrous to think these people should have to start as an O-1 or something else.  Why?  The Army creates its own shitty leaders, someone coming in off the street with real experience in their field would be a good thing.  Especially when it comes to the cyber and IT communities.


----------



## DA SWO (Jun 25, 2016)

Dame said:


> Not trying to be a smartass, but wouldn't they disqualify us (meaning you and me both) based on age?


No, some of the docs they bring in are older than dirt.


----------



## TLDR20 (Jun 25, 2016)

I continuously toy with the possibility of coming back in as a CRNA. If I could come back in starting as a Major or Lt.Col the decision would be made.


----------



## AWP (Jun 25, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> I completely disagree (line officer or not) with someone walking in off the street as anything other than a cadet or PVT. Honestly, I've always felt everyone should serve minimum of 24mths enlisted and achieve E4 prior to being admitted to an academy or ROTC program.



I strongly disagree. Prior service O's tend to be amazing or a bag of shit. Prior enlisted time does not confer wisdom at the next level.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jun 25, 2016)

Freefalling said:


> I strongly disagree. Prior service O's tend to be amazing or a bag of shit. Prior enlisted time does not confer wisdom at the next level.



I don't disagree on the wisdom aspect. My reason for that statement, is I think a lot of time, money and efforts are wasted on young men gaining a commission that never had any business putting on a uniform. The enlisted time would weed much of that out. Also it gives a understanding of what takes place at the lower enlisted level and would hopefully weed out some stupid decisions. The draw backs would obviously be a know it all officer who won't listen, but those will get grinded out. I'd rather deal with some attitude vs someone who just doesn't care and doesn't want to be there.

$.02


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jun 25, 2016)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> I don't disagree on the wisdom aspect. My reason for that statement, is I think a lot of time, money and efforts are wasted on young men gaining a commission that never had any business putting on a uniform. The enlisted time would weed much of that out. Also it gives a understanding of what takes place at the lower enlisted level and would hopefully weed out some stupid decisions. The draw backs would obviously be a know it all officer who won't listen, but those will get grinded out. I'd rather deal with some attitude vs someone who just care and doesn't want to be there.
> 
> $.02



Two thoughts:

1.)These will likely be direct commissions, with basic looking a Boy Scout 2 week orientation. They will not be line officers, and will not be able to make any Line Officer decisions. The NCO's within the Officers sphere of influence will keep them in check.

2.) The commissions these officers will get, will come out of the Line Officer allotments. That said, the higher in rank they go, the greater will be the competition for rank. Maybe 80% will see 0-3, 40% 0-4 and 20% seeing 0-5. I doubt many will see active service long enough to see full retirement. They will be scalped down, with new direct commissioned officers filling in the lower ranks. Don't expect the line to cough up retirement winning slots.

Something I would like to see, is each new officer going through OCS. The cost of OCS slots-v-Boy Scout Camp slots, will keep OCS a line officer only requirement.

Above is the life of medical support Officers, nonMD eye docs, Physical Therapy, Food Service,  Veterinarians, and a few others  are all in the same USAF Corps, competing for the same promotion spots. I think that will be the model for Civilian to Officer folks.

My $.02.


----------



## policemedic (Jun 25, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> I continuously toy with the possibility of coming back in as a CRNA. If I could come back in starting as a Major or Lt.Col the decision would be made.



All the advanced practice nursing students I worked with through USUHS were MAJ (or other service equivalent); one may have been a LTC.  Unlike their counterparts who are earning their MD though USUHS, nurses don't lose rank while they are there. 

You may want to consider USUHS for your CRNA training, especially since they're combining it into a dual DNP/CRNA program.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jun 25, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> I continuously toy with the possibility of coming back in as a CRNA. If I could come back in starting as a Major or Lt.Col the decision would be made.



When I was in the Army, CRNA's came in as First Lt., In the USAF, a few years later, they came onboard as First Lts too. If they had several years of experience, they might see railroad tracks. The only direct commissions that came in as Capt were Lawyers and MDs. I knew one General Surgeon who came onboard as an 0-4. He was in his 50's and saw patients in his office. In the five months I knew him, we only saw him in the OR once, and that was to help an OB/Gyn Doc. He was sent off somewhere, and have no idea what happened to him. 

It would be worth your while to chat with a Nurse Recruiter. The nursing, and CRNA shortage may be enough to see you come on as an 0-3.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 28, 2016)

Red Flag 1 said:


> Two thoughts:
> 
> 1.)These will likely be direct commissions, with basic looking a Boy Scout 2 week orientation. They will not be line officers, and will not be able to make any Line Officer decisions. The NCO's within the Officers sphere of influence will keep them in check.
> 
> ...



It's been my experience that direct commissions, as a rule, want to do their job and not get involved in the intricacies of command/leadership.  As they climb in rank they are expected to to hold collateral duties and some leadership roles.  In the Navy the Chiefs are very much engaged in assisting groom offices in leadership.  Likewise the senior officers in that particular community mentor those below who want to grow.  The ones who want to achieve rank and leadership stay in until retirement and go to the ticket-punching command and leadership schools, the others, usually long enough to fulfill their contractual obligation.

As for competition for rank and advancement, at last in the Navy, it is within a particular community.  I wasn't competing with Line officer O1s/O2s, and O3s for promotion, just those within my community.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jun 28, 2016)

Devildoc said:


> It's been my experience that direct commissions, as a rule, want to do their job and not get involved in the intricacies of command/leadership.  As they climb in rank they are expected to to hold collateral duties and some leadership roles.  In the Navy the Chiefs are very much engaged in assisting groom offices in leadership.  Likewise the senior officers in that particular community mentor those below who want to grow.  The ones who want to achieve rank and leadership stay in until retirement and go to the ticket-punching command and leadership schools, the others, usually long enough to fulfill their contractual obligation.
> 
> As for competition for rank and advancement, at last in the Navy, it is within a particular community.  I wasn't competing with Line officer O1s/O2s, and O3s for promotion, just those within my community.



I concur,@ Devildoc. As an officer progresses in his/her field of involvement, there are "career broadening" assignments that interface them with line officers. If it goes well, the OER's look much stronger when competing for promotion.

The Line slots that are given up for non line officers are pretty much stable from year to year. As the officer moves along in their career, the "career broadening"  gives the officer the chance to get endorsements from line officers.


----------



## SOSTCRNA (Jun 28, 2016)

TLDR20 said:


> I continuously toy with the possibility of coming back in as a CRNA. If I could come back in starting as a Major or Lt.Col the decision would be made.



Look into USAGPAN (Army's CRNA school) when you start applying. It's a top rated program and you get all your pay and benefits for the whole 36 months.  This is huge.  The direct accession guys I went to school with did OBC at Ft Sam then straight over to school.  You may have to start as an 0-1E but will be close to captain when you graduate, depends on how much constructive credit you get for working as an RN before you start.  Rank doesn't matter in school anyway, you're always the low man.  Once you do your payback and start getting the full retention bonus (currently $50,000) you will be making more than any one else at your pay grade except some docs. Plus you can moonlight for some extra cash and experience.


----------



## BloodStripe (Aug 1, 2016)

I was approached by my command about going before a Direct Commission Officer board in July.  Turns out the Supply Corps is really hurting for Contacting Officers.  I never envisioned myself being a Supply Corps officer in the Navy. I spoke with a few Commanders and Lt. Commanders and the consenus was the best shot is to be DAWIA Lvl 2 certified, hold a warrant, and have an MBA. So, once I finish up my MBA, I have full intentions to at least go before the board and put forth my best effort. Yes, it's a measly two week summer camp after you are accepted, but never the less, you are a commissioned officer.


----------



## Devildoc (Aug 1, 2016)

NavyBuyer said:


> I was approached by my command about going before a Direct Commission Officer board in July.  Turns out the Supply Corps is really hurting for Contacting Officers.  I never envisioned myself being a Supply Corps officer in the Navy. I spoke with a few Commanders and Lt. Commanders and the consenus was the best shot is to be DAWIA Lvl 2 certified, hold a warrant, and have an MBA. So, once I finish up my MBA, I have full intentions to at least go before the board and put forth my best effort. *Yes, it's a measly two week summer camp after you are accepted, but never the less, you are a commissioned officer*.



I did DCO school.  I was prior enlisted, as was maybe a third of the class, and, yes, for us it was particularly easy.  Very well run, very professional, a great school.  But easy.


----------



## Teufel (Aug 6, 2016)

That sounds like a great opportunity @NavyBuyer


----------

