Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. You've done a good job throughout your career but they discharge you for not advancing to the next grade, and the reason you don't advance is because of politics, or your wife did not kiss a superior officer's wife's a$$ by attending her parties or schmoozing with her, etc.
2. You get discharged just before meeting a milestone, such as the 20-year service date.
To #1, this isn't how we've experienced advancement in the Navy. After so many years since your last promotion you are in zone. Your record gets sent to a committee of people who have never met you who decide if you warrant advancement based on various factors (PT scores, deployments, FitReps etc). That list is sent to Congress for approval.
No military experience here, but I never did understand their "up-or-out" policy. Why would you want to fire somebody with umpteen years experience, and is probably as comfortable and assured (in a good way) as it is possible to be in military life, and that just because they didn't get promoted from lieutenant commander to commander? If you're the LCDR who gets discharged, what happens if it turns out that your replacement can't hack it?
Does this rule apply to all officers, i.e. including professional specialists like JAG officers and medics, or only to those who command fighting soldiers?
1. You've done a good job throughout your career but they discharge you for not advancing to the next grade, and the reason you don't advance is because of politics, or your wife did not kiss a superior officer's wife's a$$ by attending her parties or schmoozing with her, etc.
2. You get discharged just before meeting a milestone, such as the 20-year service date.
sounds like a couple of excuses to explain a failed career-----
sounds like a couple of excuses to explain a failed career-----
I don't think so; I've read about this policy before and it's been in place for at least fifty years, if not more. As a matter of fact, the other place I've read about the up-or-out rule is in a 1960 World Book Encyclopedia I happen to own. The way it was explained in the encyclopedia was--if memory serves--that you get three chances seriatim. If you get passed over the third time, then you're expected to resign.
No military experience here, but I never did understand their "up-or-out" policy. Why would you want to fire somebody with umpteen years experience, and is probably as comfortable and assured (in a good way) as it is possible to be in military life, and that just because they didn't get promoted from lieutenant commander to commander? If you're the LCDR who gets discharged, what happens if it turns out that your replacement can't hack it?
Does this rule apply to all officers, i.e. including professional specialists like JAG officers and medics, or only to those who command fighting soldiers?
No mil experience here either . . . but the concept would seem to be that there is a long line of people behind the non-advancing service member, so best not to clog up the pipelines. Also, would seem to imply that the jobs are easy to learn - not sure if that is actually true.
No military experience here, but I never did understand their "up-or-out" policy. Why would you want to fire somebody with umpteen years experience, and is probably as comfortable and assured (in a good way) as it is possible to be in military life, and that just because they didn't get promoted from lieutenant commander to commander? If you're the LCDR who gets discharged, what happens if it turns out that your replacement can't hack it?
Does this rule apply to all officers, i.e. including professional specialists like JAG officers and medics, or only to those who command fighting soldiers?
The rank it applies to varies depending on job, but it does apply to all officers. The reasoning is, they only want the best to advance to the highest ranks, so if you were passed over XX number of times, you aren't good enough to stay in. They feel there is a reason you were passed over, and passed over, and passed over. Almost all officers are forced out at some point because of this rule.
sounds like a couple of excuses to explain a failed career-----
Was thinking of my wife's brother-in-law, a lieut. colonel pilot in the USAF who used to fuel bombers while they were in flight on a mission. He had medals up the gazoo but failed to make full bird colonel in the required time and was pressured to retire. His introverted wife was a Mormon who was obsessed with her
hobby of geneaology and had no interest in socializing with the other wives.
Wasn't referring to my "career." I was a drafted grunt 11B10 in VietNam and never exceeded PFC. Getting out of the green weenie was always my goal.
The rank it applies to varies depending on job, but it does apply to all officers. The reasoning is, they only want the best to advance to the highest ranks, so if you were passed over XX number of times, you aren't good enough to stay in. They feel there is a reason you were passed over, and passed over, and passed over. Almost all officers are forced out at some point because of this rule.
How are they forced out? Dismissed, as in a civilian job? Or are they given lousy assignments until they voluntarily resign? Or are there contracts just not renewed?
I am thinking that in some of the economic downturns staying in may be the only rational choice.
Oh my. Okay. Yes, "up or out" is policy. Generally, an officer can expect three looks (but not always--ie, I never got a below zone look for major). One look is below their "zone of consideration", one in their primary zone, and one above zone look. The last two are ones that count for "up or out". Entry into said zone is time dependent on how long one has been in their current grade / rank and it varies for all ranks. You are not picked up on that "above zone" look, there is no resigning / "oh, I'll just stay in", etc. No later than seven months and one day since the board that considered said officer received its final approval (the results), you are exiting stage right. See ya.
Now, caveats to this: selective retention boards (said officer doesn't make the next grade, but they are selectively retained for a set amount of time / number of years) and making it to the eighteen year sanctuary zone (make it to eighteen, you will make to twenty).
With that said, if the OP's brother in law made it to LTC, he should have been within the 18 year sanctuary zone and retired at 20. I am a little confused on how that didn't occur.
Last edited by icarian; 12-21-2013 at 08:51 PM..
Reason: grammar
With that said, if the OP's brother in law made it to LTC, he should have been within the 18 year sanctuary zone and retired at 20. I am a little confused on how that didn't occur.
It apparently did occur:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvert Hall '62
He had medals up the gazoo but failed to make full bird colonel in the required time and was pressured to retire.
So he retired as an O-5 instead of O-6... Just chit-chat talk.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
