FY13 Zone Message

Postby Wolfpack » Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:21 pm

COMEVIL wrote:To bring it back to a more productive discussion...

Is the above statement really true regarding IW Officers? Have we downsized at all? SER didn't affect the Restricted Line. Not sure that explains the change as much as the fact that folks are sticking around longer because of the economy.

Still curious as to how much longer this trend can continue and what the long term implications are for the community.

And again, we can all assume this is bad for the community, but is that really the case?


The entire Navy is downsizing, to include the IW community. Over the last two or so years, there have been cuts across all the officer communities(some more than others). IPs took it in the shorts in FY12. Again, where there are cuts at the O4-O6 level, the ramifications go all the way down. For example, when the O5 N39 got cut at C2F, that promotion opportunity went way. There were a ton of cuts last year all over the NAvy and the Joint world. Also, in FY12, the non-URL communities were the bill payers to pay for URL officer JO requirements.
  • 0

Wolfpack
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 1:14 am
Location: Wash DC
Reputation: 6

Postby COMEVIL » Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:35 am

Wolfpack wrote:The entire Navy is downsizing, to include the IW community. Over the last two or so years, there have been cuts across all the officer communities(some more than others). IPs took it in the shorts in FY12. Again, where there are cuts at the O4-O6 level, the ramifications go all the way down. For example, when the O5 N39 got cut at C2F, that promotion opportunity went way. There were a ton of cuts last year all over the NAvy and the Joint world. Also, in FY12, the non-URL communities were the bill payers to pay for URL officer JO requirements.


Honestly didn't realize it was that bad for the IW community...
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 36

Postby Sum1 » Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:37 pm

COMEVIL wrote:Honestly didn't realize it was that bad for the IW community...


You say that like our woes are disproportional to other officer communities, which I don't think is the case.
  • 0

Sum1
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 961
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 1:43 am
Reputation: 15

Postby COMEVIL » Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:40 pm

Posted via Mobile Device Did not mean to imply that at all. But I still wonder about such a drastic change in zone size. Only 8 in zone for CDR? That seems remarkably small to me.
  • 0

User avatar
COMEVIL
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 846
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:54 am
Reputation: 36

FY13 Zone Message

Postby IW OCM » Mon Dec 12, 2011 6:25 pm

As always, I'm happy to make time to discuss specifics if you'd like to call. The factors that impacted last year's promotion plan are still relevant today. As Sum1 said, that was put out in a previous post.

As a data point, law and SECNAV policy dictate that the average flow points [i.e. when you pin on] for the control grades (O-4 thru O-6) be as follows:

LCDR: 9 - 11 yrs
CDR: 15-17 yrs
CAPT: 21-23 yrs

For FY-13, the actual IW average flow points are as follows:

LCDR: 10 yrs 1 mo
CDR: 16 yrs 2 mo
CAPT: 21 yrs 8 mo

This is as good if not better than the FY-13 promo plan for URL.

R/,

IW OCM
  • 0

User avatar
IW OCM
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:13 am
Location: Arlington, TN
Reputation: 1

Postby 1610MATROS » Mon Dec 12, 2011 8:20 pm

Thanks IWOCM,

Many people just look at the number in the zone and compare with previous years. It is about flow points.

Where we could do better is socializing the information across the community. We ALL share a responsibility to do that with our wardrooms !!
  • 0

1610MATROS
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 11:21 pm
Reputation: 0

Postby OmegaMan » Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:17 pm

Is there any indication about selection rates at this time? I remember the reviewing IWOCM's brief to the 3FLT waterfront, and arrows indicating potential inprovement over last year's rates, but is the IWOCM at liberty to discuss something more accurate?
  • 0

OmegaMan
 

Postby Twidget » Tue Dec 13, 2011 12:07 am

IW OCM wrote: As a data point, law and SECNAV policy dictate that the average flow points [i.e. when you pin on] for the control grades (O-4 thru O-6) be as follows:

LCDR: 9 - 11 yrs
CDR: 15-17 yrs
CAPT: 21-23 yrs

For FY-13, the actual IW average flow points are as follows:

LCDR: 10 yrs 1 mo
CDR: 16 yrs 2 mo
CAPT: 21 yrs 8 mo


OCM, Thanks for the input. Your perspective is always appreciated. The continuing trend from last year was not a great surprise, although I didn't think it would be quite as small a zone. What is concerning is the prospective for a continuing trend. Do you know how this will work in FY-14 and beyond?

With ~6 month zone sizes for two years now, our promotion time to LCDR has been pushed to the right to match the dictated flow point. Since our community is "on target" now, will the zone size increase next year, or do you project continued slippage?

Thanks again!
  • 0

Brought to you by the Paranoia Protection Counsel..."We're watching you 24/7 to make sure you're not being followed."
User avatar
Twidget
Moderator
 
Posts: 168
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:40 pm
Location: OCONUS
Reputation: 26

Postby IW OCM » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:21 am

Twidget wrote:OCM, Thanks for the input. Your perspective is always appreciated. The continuing trend from last year was not a great surprise, although I didn't think it would be quite as small a zone. What is concerning is the prospective for a continuing trend. Do you know how this will work in FY-14 and beyond?

With ~6 month zone sizes for two years now, our promotion time to LCDR has been pushed to the right to match the dictated flow point. Since our community is "on target" now, will the zone size increase next year, or do you project continued slippage?

Thanks again!


When the promotion plan is built, we make a projection for a 5-year period. So this year's plan covered FY-13 through FY-17.

Projection is a very very loose term in this regard. It assumes a couple things:

(1) That you know what the future requirements will be [this is called OPA or Officer Programmed Authorizations, the manpower "spaces" that have $$ put against them]. OPA can (and does) change regularly for many and varied reasons that are beyond the scope of this note.

(2) That you know what the future losses (i.e. retirements, resignations, etc) will be. We use a running average (1, 3, 5 and 10 years) of the historical loss rate to forecast how many folks we THINK will leave from each paygrade each year. In the near term we can more or less track this by-name since we know who has indicated their intent to retire or resign. Further out it becomes more of a guesstimate since you don't really know what retention will be like 5 years from now. All we really know in the out-years is who will reach the statutory retirement age (not many). Factors like the economy play into future retention.

The promotion planners are directed to keep a "relatively similar" opportunity rate (NOT selection rate) over a five-year period. That means typicially +/- 10% of the range dictated by law and policy. So if the moving targets are losses and requirements (OPA), then in order for the equation to work out, you have to modify the zone size.

What has actually pushed flow points to the right is a reduction of control grade OPA. The reductions included roll-downs in order to pay for URL JO OPA, and cuts that occurred due to directed efficiencies (JFCOM, C2F disestablishment, less GSA/IA demand signal). Less OPA + high retention = less vacancies. Similar opportunity rates + less vacancies = smaller zones = right-trending flow point.

To give exact numbers for flow point projections is not terribly useful for the reasons I state above. It's not always accurate to extrapolate the current year's zone size and project it across the FYDP because as we've seen, zones can expand and contract. The bottom line: expect to wear the control grade rank about a year longer than you thought you would. Evaluate how this impacts career timing gates and talk to your leaders and mentors about the implications (i.e. FITREPs, PRD, next tour, etc).

Does it stink to have to wait longer to promote? Yes. Is it good to still have a job with outstanding benefits? Yes.
  • 0

User avatar
IW OCM
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 4:13 am
Location: Arlington, TN
Reputation: 1

Postby yoshi » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:44 am

Thank you for the explanation of the process, its the best I have seen to date. Makes sense to me to discuss/teach this somewhere at the beginning of an officer's career. I hope this is happening somewhere. One real quick question, if you don't mind - Is the direction received by promotion planners to maintain a relatively similar opportunity rate over a five year period legislated, formalized policy, or informal guidance? Just curious.
  • 0

yoshi
Experienced Member
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:10 am
Reputation: 19

PreviousNext

Return to Detailer/Community Management Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron