We have to watch an 'All Hands' that is being broadcast from the USS Bataan......
Sec Mabus has just announced command level breathalyzer testing when assuming duty in the morning.
Another push on sexual assault training.
He has only been talking for 10 minutes so far.
All off duty alcohol incidents will be reviewed before someone can be promoted.
Motorcycle safety....
Now he is talking about physical fitness...No more waivers, wieght lifters aren't gunna be happy.
Uh oh....he's talking about smokers......
No more discounts on smoking products at the PX....
A new position has been formed "Diversity Officer"...
Marines are going to have female SNCO (SSgt & above) & Officers (Capt & above) at the battalion level in the combat arms fields....in 6 months....
I can't tell if this is stream of consciousness or if you NEED one of those breathalyzer tests... ;)
Is this the equivalent of Smuck in a meeting Tweeting?
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 05, 2012, 04:09:17 PM
I can't tell if this is stream of consciousness or if you NEED one of those breathalyzer tests... ;)
Is this the equivalent of Smuck in a meeting Tweeting?
No, it sounds like a idiot has just been promoted and Smuck is in need of us buying him a drink.
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 05, 2012, 03:43:44 PM
Marines are going to have female SNCO (SSgt & above) & Officers (Capt & above) at the battalion level in the combat arms fields....in 6 months....
Oh, this is going to end well. I can just feel it.
Quote from: LongBlade on March 05, 2012, 05:10:59 PM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 05, 2012, 04:09:17 PM
I can't tell if this is stream of consciousness or if you NEED one of those breathalyzer tests... ;)
Is this the equivalent of Smuck in a meeting Tweeting?
No, it sounds like a idiot has just been promoted and Smuck is in need of us buying him a drink.
I'd say several drinks, actually!
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 05, 2012, 04:09:17 PM
Is this the equivalent of Smuck in a meeting Tweeting?
Yes, it was the equivalent of a tweet....
The expansion of the sexual harrassment instruction and the new 'Diversity Officer' billet is probably the result of the Sergeant that was dry humping his boyfriend while in uniform when he returned from deployment.
The other 'new' rules are probably designed to thin the herd.
The females in Infantry Battalions......I'm not sure about that. I don't see them humping for 26 miles with 80 pound packs in eight hours.....
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 05, 2012, 06:16:59 PM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 05, 2012, 04:09:17 PM
Is this the equivalent of Smuck in a meeting Tweeting?
Yes, it was the equivalent of a tweet....
The expansion of the sexual harrassment instruction and the new 'Diversity Officer' billet is probably the result of the Sergeant that was dry humping his boyfriend while in uniform when he returned from deployment.
The other 'new' rules are probably designed to thin the herd.
The females in Infantry Battalions......I'm not sure about that. I don't see them humping for 26 miles with 80 pound packs in eight hours.....
Ewwwww on the dry humping.... thats a lack of couth
Thinning the herd is usually good if the forces of selection are designed to improve overall unit capability
I know a few lesbians who could lay the smack down on a typical serviceman .... ( insert someone's name here and infer that they are one of them by saying "They are not one of them."**)
** I wanted to say LB, but hell he had snow and his back is probably sore
Quote from: Windigo on March 05, 2012, 08:47:53 PM
Ewwwww on the dry humping.... thats a lack of couth
Going on a hump is grunt speak for a force march. ;)
Quote from: Windigo on March 05, 2012, 08:47:53 PM
Thinning the herd is usually good if the forces of selection are designed to improve overall unit capability
It should be a good thing but we have never 'thinned' easily. The last time was in 91-93, we lost a lot of good people and kept some dead weight. Same thing happened after the Vietnam War & WW II.
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 05, 2012, 06:16:59 PM
The females in Infantry Battalions......I'm not sure about that. I don't see them humping for 26 miles with 80 pound packs in eight hours.....
IMHO anyone who can hump 26 miles with 80 pounds on their back and can do so consistently is good to go. If they can't, well, that's that.
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 05, 2012, 06:16:59 PM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 05, 2012, 04:09:17 PM
Is this the equivalent of Smuck in a meeting Tweeting?
Yes, it was the equivalent of a tweet....
The expansion of the sexual harrassment instruction and the new 'Diversity Officer' billet is probably the result of the Sergeant that was dry humping his boyfriend while in uniform when he returned from deployment.
The other 'new' rules are probably designed to thin the herd.
The females in Infantry Battalions......I'm not sure about that. I don't see them humping for 26 miles with 80 pound packs in eight hours.....
Are you talking about the now famous and "historic" gay marine kissing pic guy?
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 05, 2012, 08:54:37 PM
Quote from: Windigo on March 05, 2012, 08:47:53 PM
Thinning the herd is usually good if the forces of selection are designed to improve overall unit capability
It should be a good thing but we have never 'thinned' easily. The last time was in 91-93, we lost a lot of good people and kept some dead weight. Same thing happened after the Vietnam War & WW II.
intelligent thinning is never easy for any organization.
Okay...so here is the non Smuck-tweet bullets:
The highlights:
• Mandatory Breathalyzer tests for duty sections, and random tests for others, beginning this year.
"We're not telling you not to drink, if you're old enough," Mabus said. "We are telling you that it's important to keep legal, responsible use of alcohol from turning into a problem. ... Sailors who drink excessively or too late the night before and report to duty can place themselves, their shipmates and equipment at risk."
Mabus said the tests will not be used for punitive purposes but to identify sailors in need of training, counseling or treatment.
• Beefed-up sexual assault prevention training, including three 90-minute sessions for every sailor during their "A" school training.
"A sexual assault is an attack on a sailor or Marine, and none of their shipmates should tolerate such an attack," Mabus said. "All allegations will be thoroughly investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted."
• More mandatory training for motorcycle riders, and a zero-tolerance stance on drinking and driving. To ensure that officers "set the example of zero tolerance for drinking and driving," Mabus said the Navy is establishing a formal policy that requires "any alcohol-related incident to be properly reviewed prior to an officer's promotion."
• Moving from a culture of testing to a culture of physical fitness in an effort to promote year-round fitness, even on smaller ships at sea, and avoiding "cramming" for semi-annual fitness tests.
"Fuel to Fight" will introduce more healthy food options to sailors' diets. And the Navy will take additional steps toward being smoke-free with a new educational campaign, free smoking cessation products or services afloat and ashore to anyone who wants to quit, and, beginning between now and Sept. 30, the end of discounts on smoking products in Navy exchanges and ship's stores.
• Establishment of a new Department of the Navy Diversity Officer.
"We are better warfighters when we have a diversity of ideas, experiences, expertise and backgrounds to fulfill our variety of missions," Mabus said.
In particular, he said he wants to improve the Navy and Marine Corps as places "where more women want to stay and make a career and move on to the top ranks of our officers and our NCOs."
• To that end, Mabus announced a remarkable initiative: a 12-month operational deferment for uniformed mothers following the birth of a child. The Navy is also introducing a "career intermission program," now in pilot form, that will allow men or women to leave and return to the services after up to three years, without penalty, after taking time off to raise a child or a relative. Service members will be allowed to retain their military health care and exchange and commissary shopping privileges and restart their careers "at exactly the point" where they left off.
Certain shore commands will allow for flexible work hours and "tele-work" for up to two days a week," Mabus said.
• A web-based credentialing program that will allow sailors to earn civilian certifications and licenses that correspond to their Navy ratings, collateral duties and out-of-rating assignments.
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2012/03/navy-wellness-initiative-test-alcohol-drugs-030512/
Quote from: LongBlade on March 05, 2012, 05:10:59 PM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 05, 2012, 04:09:17 PM
I can't tell if this is stream of consciousness or if you NEED one of those breathalyzer tests... ;)
Is this the equivalent of Smuck in a meeting Tweeting?
No, it sounds like a idiot has just been promoted and Smuck is in need of us buying him a drink.
I would gladly buy Smuck a drink to help him handle the babbling of said idiot & help him to ease into the politically correct 21st century, but he'll need to travel to Nova Scotia to get it!! :P
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 05, 2012, 06:16:59 PM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 05, 2012, 04:09:17 PM
Is this the equivalent of Smuck in a meeting Tweeting?
Yes, it was the equivalent of a tweet....
The expansion of the sexual harrassment instruction and the new 'Diversity Officer' billet is probably the result of the Sergeant that was dry humping his boyfriend while in uniform when he returned from deployment.
You'll get used to it. Heck, when I was a 2Lt (back in 1999) I actually did a stint as a UHRA (Unit Human Rights Advisor), as I was a Registered Social Worker on civvy street. I almost got tossed out of the training because, at one point, I was laughing so hard (with tears streaming down my face) that I almost fell out of my chair. Then I got into a verbal donnybrook with a gay army Captain instructor. Ah, good times. It all works out in the end.
Quote
The females in Infantry Battalions......I'm not sure about that. I don't see them humping for 26 miles with 80 pound packs in eight hours.....
Don't worry, they'll reduce the standards for females in order for them to measure-up! ::)
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 05, 2012, 08:54:37 PM
Quote from: Windigo on March 05, 2012, 08:47:53 PM
Thinning the herd is usually good if the forces of selection are designed to improve overall unit capability
It should be a good thing but we have never 'thinned' easily. The last time was in 91-93, we lost a lot of good people and kept some dead weight. Same thing happened after the Vietnam War & WW II.
It's the way of world, small "p" politics and all that. >:(
Quote from: Centurion40 on March 06, 2012, 10:21:55 AM
Don't worry, they'll reduce the standards for females in order for them to measure-up! ::)
Sumtin ain't be addin up here....
Okay, we are cutting back on the forces...personel cuts....check, understood.
Now we are also going to have deferments for pregnancies and a "career intermission program" for the parents to raise the child for the first three years. They will keep medical and exchange privileges during that time and "pick up" where they left off when they went on the "intermission" ???
Sooooooo in addition to cutting forces, we will retain non operational forces for up to three years and give them full benefits.......someone help me understand this.....
I understand the why, but given the conversation we had about the DoD and the budget, I'm not sure about the how.
Let me ask you something, how are the MC and Navy recruitment numbers? Do you think some of these initiatives are to get recruitment up by making it more of an attractive "job" options (i.e. you get maternity leave that is better than most civilian jobs)?
Quote from: Centurion40 on March 06, 2012, 10:21:55 AM
Quote
The females in Infantry Battalions......I'm not sure about that. I don't see them humping for 26 miles with 80 pound packs in eight hours.....
Don't worry, they'll reduce the standards for females in order for them to measure-up! ::)
I will simply share this anecdote.
Several years ago my wife decided she would do the Avon 3 day walk for breast cancer. It was three days of walking 20 miles a day. Women would train for months to get in shape to do this - my wife did.
One of the walking teams had a husband who was in the army. He liked to walk with the girls...with his 60 pound ruck on his back. That seemed to amaze most of them.
I dunno how many women can or cannot carry a 60 or 80 pound load for 20 miles over the course of several days, but I say if they can, they're welcome to the job.
Just don't lower the standards. I may be fat and lazy, but I don't expect anyone to lower standards so my lazy ass can be accepted into a group that I'm not fit to serve with. Why should anyone else?
The Wives (yours and mine) would make great Marines. They're probably too old though.
Quote from: Gusington on March 06, 2012, 11:20:57 AM
The Wives (yours and mine) would make great Marines. They're probably too old though.
Oh, no. My wife is no Marine. Her idea of roughing it is having to plug the curling iron in an outlet across the room.
Women have the potential to walk that distance and carry that rucksack. Let's not start sounding like Victorian England with that "fairer sex" stuff. :P
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 06, 2012, 11:05:35 AM
I understand the why, but given the conversation we had about the DoD and the budget, I'm not sure about the how.
Let me ask you something, how are the MC and Navy recruitment numbers? Do you think some of these initiatives are to get recruitment up by making it more of an attractive "job" options (i.e. you get maternity leave that is better than most civilian jobs)?
I can't give an accurate guess on the Navy side of the house but specific to the Marines; we generally have no problems making our recruitment goals. The Marines push is on service, commitment, honor....not job opportunities, expeditionary, deploy with a moments notice.....
We need to have the drawdown, no arguement there but what ends up happening is some good and some bad get the boot. With the 'deferment' now you have a Marine locked into a duty station for at least 20-21 months. Someone will have to take her place when the unit gets called to deploy.
The intermission program is even more of a goat rope. We are talking about drawdown yet we will allow someone to take a three year break from the military, maintain health and PX priviliges and come back at the same point when the three years are over. In laymen's terms, the job is allocated to someone that isn't there to do the job and it can't be filled by someone else.....while cutting workers and not adding new employees.
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 06, 2012, 11:26:43 AM
Women have the potential to walk that distance and carry that rucksack. Let's not start sounding like Victorian England with that "fairer sex" stuff. :P
Potential doesn't win battles.
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 06, 2012, 11:29:53 AM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 06, 2012, 11:26:43 AM
Women have the potential to walk that distance and carry that rucksack. Let's not start sounding like Victorian England with that "fairer sex" stuff. :P
Potential doesn't win battles.
+1. Let the carry the ruck. If they can, no big deal.
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 06, 2012, 11:29:53 AM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 06, 2012, 11:26:43 AM
Women have the potential to walk that distance and carry that rucksack. Let's not start sounding like Victorian England with that "fairer sex" stuff. :P
Potential doesn't win battles.
EDIT: Let me rephrase that.
I meant that they can rise to meet the expectations. There are no scientifically valid arguments that women cannot physically do this.
I really think The Wife could have done it five years ago. She is an ass kicker and very strong both mentally and physically...she is not the average woman. It would have been a great to watch as a tv show!
Also, I too don't understand the idea of a draw down and budget cuts while having people deferred for up to three years and still getting the benefits. But this whole conversation could lead to a very slippery slope on cuts throughout the military.
The VA, for example, is totally bloated with billions of unnecessary spending but it will never see cuts, even ones considered reasonable.
Quote from: Centurion40 on March 06, 2012, 10:21:55 AM
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 05, 2012, 06:16:59 PM
The females in Infantry Battalions......I'm not sure about that. I don't see them humping for 26 miles with 80 pound packs in eight hours.....
Don't worry, they'll reduce the standards for females in order for them to measure-up! ::)
This is what worries me, that the DoD might do exactly that.
If not, however -- if female soldiers are held to the same standards as their male counterparts (and are able to meet said standards) -- I have no problem with it.
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 06, 2012, 10:35:01 AM
Sumtin ain't be addin up here....
Okay, we are cutting back on the forces...personel cuts....check, understood.
Now we are also going to have deferments for pregnancies and a "career intermission program" for the parents to raise the child for the first three years. They will keep medical and exchange privileges during that time and "pick up" where they left off when they went on the "intermission" ???
Sooooooo in addition to cutting forces, we will retain non operational forces for up to three years and give them full benefits.......someone help me understand this.....
Bizarre. I understand why they might want to do this, but from a practical standpoint, I don't see how it could really work.
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 06, 2012, 10:35:01 AM
Quote from: Centurion40 on March 06, 2012, 10:21:55 AM
Don't worry, they'll reduce the standards for females in order for them to measure-up! ::)
Sumtin ain't be addin up here....
Okay, we are cutting back on the forces...personel cuts....check, understood.
Now we are also going to have deferments for pregnancies and a "career intermission program" for the parents to raise the child for the first three years. They will keep medical and exchange privileges during that time and "pick up" where they left off when they went on the "intermission" ???
Sooooooo in addition to cutting forces, we will retain non operational forces for up to three years and give them full benefits.......someone help me understand this.....
Its called the feminist agenda.... wake up... it really isn't about equality, its about power
There's still a feminist agenda?
Quote from: Gusington on March 06, 2012, 12:20:54 PM
There's still a feminist agenda?
absolutely.... except this one is about true power ... not bras and sex and birthcontrol
Alright guys. Come on. We already have half-naked women posted all over the board. Do we really want to be THAT stereotypical?
QuoteIts called the feminist agenda.... wake up... it really isn't about equality, its about power
As a guy who got passed over a lot recently in my job search for women of equal standing and ability, I can certainly see that argument. But I think that there is still a lot of ground to cover to be called "equal." The glass ceiling still exists.
It's hard for me to still understand that there is a feminist agenda coming from a family of Ivy League educated, powerful women. What more do they want? I will never make as much money as The Wife...well maybe by the time I retire. But she even got the dogs balls! Come on now.
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 06, 2012, 12:26:00 PM
Alright guys. Come on. We already have half-naked women posted all over the board. Do we really want to be THAT stereotypical?
QuoteIts called the feminist agenda.... wake up... it really isn't about equality, its about power
As a guy who got passed over a lot recently in my job search for women of equal standing and ability, I can certainly see that argument. But I think that there is still a lot of ground to cover to be called "equal." The glass ceiling still exists.
hmm I sense some sort of apologist here.
Sorry but I absolutely don't buy into the way feminists are trying to achieve equality ....
Much of it is based on ignoring the hard reality of well ... reality
Take Smucks example of women in the armed forces. Allowing a three year hiatus with benefits ignores the fact that that those resources are not going toward providing fighting capacity/capability and worse prevents the loss of capacity from being addressed.
Don't know about you but to me that's a misapplication and perversion of intention of having an armed force.
Just saying.....
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 06, 2012, 10:35:01 AM
Quote from: Centurion40 on March 06, 2012, 10:21:55 AM
Don't worry, they'll reduce the standards for females in order for them to measure-up! ::)
Sumtin ain't be addin up here....
Okay, we are cutting back on the forces...personel cuts....check, understood.
Now we are also going to have deferments for pregnancies and a "career intermission program" for the parents to raise the child for the first three years. They will keep medical and exchange privileges during that time and "pick up" where they left off when they went on the "intermission" ???
Sooooooo in addition to cutting forces, we will retain non operational forces for up to three years and give them full benefits.......someone help me understand this.....
Nope, yer understandin' is right some good! Welcome to the 21st century democratic egalitarian world!!! :P
Quote from: Windigo on March 06, 2012, 12:37:09 PM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 06, 2012, 12:26:00 PM
Alright guys. Come on. We already have half-naked women posted all over the board. Do we really want to be THAT stereotypical?
QuoteIts called the feminist agenda.... wake up... it really isn't about equality, its about power
As a guy who got passed over a lot recently in my job search for women of equal standing and ability, I can certainly see that argument. But I think that there is still a lot of ground to cover to be called "equal." The glass ceiling still exists.
hmm I sense some sort of apologist here.
Sorry but I absolutely don't buy into the way feminists are trying to achieve equality ....
Much of it is based on ignoring the hard reality of well ... reality
Take Smucks example of women in the armed forces. Allowing a three year hiatus with benefits ignores the fact that that those resources are not going toward providing fighting capacity/capability and worse prevents the loss of capacity from being addressed.
Don't know about you but to me that's a misapplication and perversion of intention of having an armed force.
Just saying.....
Agreed, but it's what a free society has to put up with, as we haven't seemed to figure-out how not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. A tyrant could do it, but a parliament or congress seems to lack the ability.
Windi, this conversation was going into women's capacity to lift heavy objects. I think we crossed the line of argument over special treatment of military maternity leave to something altogether different.
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 06, 2012, 02:45:15 PM
Windi, this conversation was going into women's capacity to lift heavy objects. I think we crossed the line of argument over special treatment of military maternity leave to something altogether different.
I spent a little more than a year as a volunteer fireman .... there really isn't a job in the station that an in shape 140 pound woman can do well in gear
having said that, I know some women I would never ever piss off by suggesting they shouldn't be able to fight for their country.
#note that in Canada we have maternity/parental benefits available for all employed - which is an offshoot of unemployment insurance
60% of your salary for up to one year, or 6 months for both parents
Quote from: Windigo on March 06, 2012, 02:55:53 PM
Quote from: son_of_montfort on March 06, 2012, 02:45:15 PM
Windi, this conversation was going into women's capacity to lift heavy objects. I think we crossed the line of argument over special treatment of military maternity leave to something altogether different.
I spent a little more than a year as a volunteer fireman .... there really isn't a job in the station that an in shape 140 pound woman can do well in gear
Oh there is one job that she could still do well.... ;)
Yikes... I'm checking out of this one...
Quote from: Smuckatelli on March 06, 2012, 09:58:06 AM
Okay...so here is the non Smuck-tweet bullets:
The highlights:
• Mandatory Breathalyzer tests for duty sections, and random tests for others, beginning this year.
"We're not telling you not to drink, if you're old enough," Mabus said. "We are telling you that it's important to keep legal, responsible use of alcohol from turning into a problem. ... Sailors who drink excessively or too late the night before and report to duty can place themselves, their shipmates and equipment at risk."
I had this happen to me for the first time last month. I got selected for a random urinalysis and, before I peed in the bottle I had to take a breathalyzer. I was like, "Huh?"
Mabus said the tests will not be used for punitive purposes but to identify sailors in need of training, counseling or treatment.
Don't worry, this won't have any impact on your career at the next Enlisted Retention Board or Officer Promotion Board...really, I mean it!
• Beefed-up sexual assault prevention training, including three 90-minute sessions for every sailor during their "A" school training.
"A sexual assault is an attack on a sailor or Marine, and none of their shipmates should tolerate such an attack," Mabus said. "All allegations will be thoroughly investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted."
Yeah, sexual harrassment is the big thing.
• More mandatory training for motorcycle riders, and a zero-tolerance stance on drinking and driving. To ensure that officers "set the example of zero tolerance for drinking and driving," Mabus said the Navy is establishing a formal policy that requires "any alcohol-related incident to be properly reviewed prior to an officer's promotion."
Well, I don't really disagree with this. The word on drinking and driving has been out for a while now. There's really no excuse to drink and drive, especially in the service. Every command I've been at in the last 10 years has had some sort of "safe drive" program where you get a card to carry with you that is essentially a voucher for a free cab ride, no questions asked. The cab driver turns the card into the command and is reimbursed for the drunky's ride.
• Moving from a culture of testing to a culture of physical fitness in an effort to promote year-round fitness, even on smaller ships at sea, and avoiding "cramming" for semi-annual fitness tests.
"Fuel to Fight" will introduce more healthy food options to sailors' diets. And the Navy will take additional steps toward being smoke-free with a new educational campaign, free smoking cessation products or services afloat and ashore to anyone who wants to quit, and, beginning between now and Sept. 30, the end of discounts on smoking products in Navy exchanges and ship's stores.
I was on a big deck, but generally we always had a selection of some sort of fruit and vegetable with meals. Sometimes you had to be a bit creative. However, almost always, the "meals" were horribly unhealthy. I'm on shore duty now and have the luxury of eating what I want, but a typical fast-line meal at the galley here is: cheeseburger AND hot dog (with cheese and chili if desired), and fries (cheese and chili if you want). That has to be at least 1000 calories if not more. Add as much coke as you can drink...nobody's forcing you to eat that, but that's not an atypical meal.
The guys who really suffer from these rules are the submariners. I finally got on an SSN the other day and however small you think they are, I can assure you they are twice as small as you think. It's one thing to be on a CVN or Amphib with a killer gym, but I'm not sure how you are supposed to maintain any fitness on a sub.
• Establishment of a new Department of the Navy Diversity Officer.
"We are better warfighters when we have a diversity of ideas, experiences, expertise and backgrounds to fulfill our variety of missions," Mabus said.
In particular, he said he wants to improve the Navy and Marine Corps as places "where more women want to stay and make a career and move on to the top ranks of our officers and our NCOs."
Give me a break.
• To that end, Mabus announced a remarkable initiative: a 12-month operational deferment for uniformed mothers following the birth of a child. The Navy is also introducing a "career intermission program," now in pilot form, that will allow men or women to leave and return to the services after up to three years, without penalty, after taking time off to raise a child or a relative. Service members will be allowed to retain their military health care and exchange and commissary shopping privileges and restart their careers "at exactly the point" where they left off.
This really pisses me off. What this really means, in translation, is that the rest of the crew will have to work that much harder to fill this manning shortfall. It's amazing. When a ship is getting ready to go on deployment, the pregnancy rate on the ship explodes! I wonder why?
I remember this one incident on my last ship. In general, if a woman got pregnant our skipper had her off the ship within 24 hours of being notified. This was pretty much standard practice. Well, we lost one of our master helmsmen due to pregnancy, and another got TAD'd to another ship that was in the hurt locker. So we took this female QM3 and cross-decked her to get master helmsman qual'd, sent her to the schools, etc. So we're coming up on deployment and lo and behold she gets pregnant! She goes down to berthing, packs her crap, starts making plans to live with her boyfriend out in town, and our skipper says fuck it, keep her on board. Oh man, it was priceless. He kept her on the ship for a couple of months and I admired him so much for taking that chance with his career to make a point.
I used to have these huge arguments with some of my fellow officers back before I had been on a ship about a woman's right to get pregnant on sea duty. My friends- ex-surface guys- were of the opinion that women should have NJP for getting pregnant on sea duty. I thought that was horribly discriminatory. Having been on a ship now, I can see their point. I'm not saying I agree with them, but ships are already manned around 80-85% and to lose another 5-10% to pregnancy really kills a ship's readiness, not to mention the time and money the ship spends to train them to a certain specialized NEC. It sucks.
I don't think making pregnancy more attractive is the right move when we're cutting manning to the bare bones as it is.
Certain shore commands will allow for flexible work hours and "tele-work" for up to two days a week," Mabus said.
I would like to see this for everyone, not just women.
• A web-based credentialing program that will allow sailors to earn civilian certifications and licenses that correspond to their Navy ratings, collateral duties and out-of-rating assignments.
I agree with this.
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2012/03/navy-wellness-initiative-test-alcohol-drugs-030512/
Toonces,
We're in agreement on everything.....
Something to note, there was a CPO that asked the question about gym size on ships..he was on a DDG that lost its gym to a new sonar. The MCPON towed the line with something along this...I've spent 24 years on subs....there is a lot of exercising that can be done on the deck plates.
Also, I don't think the telework wasn't just for females.
Interesting write up Toonces, particularly about the pregnancy thing. As I said earlier, isn't this sort of a budget nightmare?
How does this all relate to recruitment numbers? Do you guys think this is a drive to pull in more females and guys wanting or already in the process of having a family?
They're using every excuse under the sun to thin out the military right now; even O-4 (or E-6) is no longer a guarantee that you can retire with 20 years of service. Google "Continuation board" or "enlisted retention board". It's sad. I don't think this is a recruitment enticement move.
In fact, I can't really find a good reason for this stuff other than...I can't find a good reason actually. Yes, it's a budget (and readiness) nightmare.
A lot of the good deals in the military are going away, or have gone away. I don't necessarily disagree with some of it, but when you get used to a certain way of life (I'm over 16 years now), and then they start changing the rules this late in the game, it's disconcerting.
At Smuck- I'm sure it might (might) be possible to get a good workout on an LA SSN, but, you'd have to be VERY creative. I'm calling BS.
Quote from: Toonces on March 06, 2012, 06:23:52 PM
At Smuck- I'm sure it might (might) be possible to get a good workout on an LA SSN, but, you'd have to be VERY creative. I'm calling BS.
So am I but I've never been on one so I couldn't say for sure. Both the Navy & Marine reps flanking the SecNav appeared to be pulling the party line.....heads up & down, not left to right...
Quote from: Toonces on March 06, 2012, 06:23:52 PM
They're using every excuse under the sun to thin out the military right now; even O-4 (or E-6) is no longer a guarantee that you can retire with 20 years of service. Google "Continuation board" or "enlisted retention board". It's sad. I don't think this is a recruitment enticement move.
That is exactly what ended up happening in the early to mid 90's. After the draw down was complete around 96 they brought back the retirement for O-4/E-6.