They also will be able to log onto the Internet and discover what jobs are open in their specialties. However, when an officer wants to apply for specific openings, he or she now will have to do so with the advice and consent of their commander.
The group was headed by Gen. John A. He now serves as executive director of the Air Force Association. Increasing the involvement of commanders in the process of future assignments for the officers serving under them. Developing a Preference Worksheet to be filled out by officers, routed through their commanders, and stored electronically at the center as part of the input for determining their future assignments.
Requiring Officer Assignment Teams at the center to work more closely with losing and gaining commanders, major commands, and career field functional leaders in matching officers to assignments. Another group, made up of assignment experts and officers from the field, is to work out the details of the changes in coming months.
Whatever assignment system is used, the needs of the nation and Air Force must be paramount. A major problem with the current system, Shaud said, has been that it has offered officers greater participation in the selection of their assignments but often has not been able to deliver what they ask for. Then, many officers seemed to be applying more to avoid an assignment than to get one.
Historically, the Air Force has allowed officers to express their desire for specific assignments, but until recently the process was fairly informal. With increased use of computers, personnel managers were able to gather more data earlier and more quickly project worldwide requirements.
And with the advent of the Internet, the personnel center was able to give officers a routinely updated picture of their own assignment opportunities. In effect, it could allow them to look over the shoulders of the assignment officials for their fields and see where the job openings were developing. It was a short step from there to letting them bid for the slots that appealed to them. At a time when the service was downsizing and worried about keeping officers in needed skills, giving them a greater say in their assignments was part of the effort to make the service more attractive and improve retention.
The improvements were not without their downside, however. One was that it gave commanders less say in the selection process. By early , the Air Force introduced a new officer assignment system to exploit all the electronic tools and set up worldwide computer links.
However, officers still could shop and volunteer for assignments without notifying their commanders. But recent feedback from officers in the field had suggested that many found the merchandise not as good as advertised. A recurring comment was that many of the jobs on the electronic bulletin board were, in fact, already filled. It was against this background that Ryan called for the most recent review of the system.
It was an open-ended assignment, Shaud said. Almost 10, officers in a wide range of grades, skills, and locations responded to a survey posted on the Internet. The survey provided 14 statements and asked the respondents whether they agreed or disagreed with each or were neutral on the subject. Almost two-thirds of the officers polled agreed, for example, that Air Force needs should take precedent over individual desires.
Fewer than nine percent disagreed. Reactions were less one-sided to the statement that the current system puts the right people in the right assignment. Forty percent agreed and 39 percent disagreed.
Sentiments were divided, too, on whether the current system is clear and understandable. About 46 percent agreed that it is and 36 percent disagreed. Asked whether they agreed that the current system is fair to all career areas, however, more than half 53 percent said no and only 16 percent agreed.
About 35 percent agreed that the OPD objectives for their fields are clear and understandable but 44 percent disagreed.
About 31 percent agreed that the present assignment system encourages career development but 45 percent disagreed. Some elements of present assignment policy drew only mild reactions while others were applauded.
Some 43 percent of the officers agreed, for example, that all jobs should be filled by the best qualified, regardless of move status, and 46 percent disagreed. Only 9 percent disagreed. A whopping 85 percent also agreed that the present Internet assignment home page and electronic bulletin board are important and useful sources of information. Barely 7 percent disagreed. An even larger 93 percent agreed that the ability to provide input desires and preferences concerning assignment choices is essential to the system.
Only 3 percent disagreed. Again only three percent disagreed. Statements on commander involvement drew less one-sided reactions. About 24 percent disagreed. About 32 percent disagreed.
More than half 52 percent said that AFPC assignment teams have too much influence over assignments. Only 16 percent disagreed. The changes so far announced address some of the major assignment areas, but a number of policy questions will not be answered until the implementing instructions are worked out. Brown likened the considerations to other personnel management changes the Air Force has rolled out, including a recent overhaul of the promotion system. The service is also taking a fresh look at professional military education, Bass said, hoping to create good supervisors as well as good followers.
Your Air Force. By Rachel S. Monday, Apr Bass says the Air Force wants to make the assignment process more flexible and transparent.
Now, retention bonuses might be cut The Air Force stresses that no involuntary measures are being considered in fiscal By Stephen Losey.
About Rachel S. More In Your Air Force. The SEI system is also used to rapidly identify personnel to meet unique circumstances, contingency requirements, or other critical needs.
Manpower positions are coded with an SEI to identify positions that require or provide unique experiences or qualifications. While some assignments require special experience, the vast majority of Air Force enlisted assignment slots do not. Positions often require members assigned to have access to a specified level of classified information.
Selection for these jobs may be necessary from among members who currently have access or can be granted access immediately. Within a group of qualified members who meet the minimum eligibility criteria for PCS selection, volunteers are selected first.
Non-volunteers qualified to fill a requirement who meet the minimum PCS eligibility criteria are selected ahead of qualified volunteers who do not. A qualified volunteer who meets the minimum TOS requirement is considered first in order of longest on the station. Next, the qualified non-volunteer who meets the TOS requirement in the order of longest on station and finally the qualified volunteer who does not meet the TOS requirement may be considered.
First-term Airmen serving an initial enlistment of four or more years may not be given more than two assignments in different locations following initial basic and skill training during their first four years of service, regardless of tour length.
First-term Airmen who make two PCS moves are permitted an additional PCS in conjunction with an approved humanitarian reassignment, a join-spouse assignment, as a volunteer, or when the PCS is a mandatory move such as returning from a tour at the end of the prescribed tour length.
A member is considered available for reassignment on the first day of the month in which they're available. Deferments may be authorized when possible in most grades and jobs to maintain an equitable assignment system and also support the need for stability in certain organizations or functions.
Deferments also exist for such things as completion of an educational program or degree, to serve as a witness for a court-martial, when accused in a court-martial, to control the roster, Article 15 punishment, base of preference BOP program, retraining or humanitarian reasons.
The humanitarian policy provides reassignment or deferment for Air Force members to assist them in resolving severe short-term problems involving a family member. The problem must be resolvable within a reasonable period of time and the member's presence must be considered absolutely essential to resolve the problem. Family members under the humanitarian program are limited to a spouse, children, parents, parents-in-law, and those persons who have served in loco parentis one who has exercised parental rights and responsibilities in place of a natural parent.
While brothers and sisters are not included in the definition of a family member for humanitarian consideration, a request involving a brother's or sister's terminal illness often is considered as an exception to the policy.
This program is based on a member's need for special medical or educational care for a spouse or child that is required long-term, possibly permanently. It is not a base-of-choice program as assignment decisions are based on manning needs of the Air Force at locations where a member's special medical or educational needs for a spouse or child can be met.
Under the EFMP, a member may receive a reassignment if a need arises for specialized care that cannot be met where they are currently assigned. A deferment from an assignment may be provided for a newly identified condition if the member's presence is considered essential.
The purpose of such a deferment is to allow the member time to establish a special medical treatment program or educational program for the exceptional family member. When granted, the initial period of deferment is usually 12 months, after which a member may be reconsidered for PCS if otherwise eligible.
Each member of a military couple serves in their own right. This means military couples must fulfill the obligations inherent to all Air Force members they are considered for assignments to fill valid manning requirements and must perform duties that require the skills in which they are trained.
Provided these criteria are met, military couples may be considered for assignment where they can maintain a joint residence.
0コメント