Posted on 12/27/2013 4:17:17 AM PST by markomalley
The Air Force this week announced that airmen will be judged on how they create a positive work environment in addition to how well they do their jobs.
The move comes at the end of a year that left the service mired in scandal. The biggest centers on sexual misconduct between recruits and drill instructors at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas.
In a news release, the Air Force said airmen would be graded on how they contributed to a culture of “dignity and respect”.
Formally adding it to the evaluation paperwork, considered by promotion boards, adds consequences for those who fall short. Basically the message is those who act out can forget about adding stripes.
Here’s an excerpt from the Air Force news release.
This increased focus is part of the overall Air Force effort to accentuate the emphasis on sexual assault prevention and response but encompasses a great deal more, according to Lt. Gen. Sam Cox, the deputy chief of staff for Manpower, Personnel and Services.
According to the general, organizational climate is defined as the way members in a unit perceive and characterize their unit environment. All Airmen are responsible for creating an organizational climate in which every member is treated with dignity and respect.
“It has always been the duty of every Airman to positively contribute to a healthy organizational climate by being a good wingman, adhering to and enforcing standards, not allowing any action that is harmful to the good order and discipline of the unit, not tolerating sexual assault and harassment or any type of discrimination, and of course, building an environment based on a foundation of dignity and respect,” Cox said. “This modification to policy now reinforces our responsibilities for organizational climate, ensures it is discussed during feedback and mandates its consideration on every Airman’s evaluation.”
So, in other words, Airmen will now officially be graded based upon how politically correct they are: do they support "diversity" ("dignity and respect" = do you support sodomites)
Reason #264,570 why I'm glad I'm long, long retired.
What about their skill at producing a negative work environment for enemy airmen and ground forces?
Translation: Treat the women, homos, and minorities with kid gloves or it will cost you that future stripe.
And 30 or 40 years ago we would have all taken that comment at face value. Yes, there are people who are poison to morale and no one wants to work with them. Those people needed to conform to standards or get out. Unfortunately none of us read that statement the way we used to. Now the military conforms to the outcasts instead of the other way around.
Roger that. I retired in 1988. I don't think I could, or would do it over again. Too much PC for me.
No, this has a different trail.
Back in the 1970s/1980s...folks knew how to lead. Today? They’ve lost their knack for making decisions that people respect. So they created these yearly evaluations and polling data. Forty folks from a unit will comment if the unit is ok, marginal, or running great. Sadly, this is the only method today that commanders and supervisors have to judge their work atmosphere.
I retired in 1999 from the AF and can recall this polling just starting up, and some commanders being shocked that people complained about the dishonest atmosphere, toxic work relations of some people, and lousy personal evaluations. These pollings got around....to the commander’s commander, and I came to note quickly...they would haul up some guy and literally put some hefty fear into his promotion plans.
The AF over the past twenty years has done a lousy job of finding good leaders and keeping them. The smart guys with potential....got out and found careers in Fortune 500 companies. A lot of the time, we ended up with Generals who were simply marginally getting by and couldn’t make a decision if their life depended on it.
Roger that. I retired in 1988. I don't think I could, or would do it over again. Too much PC for me.
In other words bend over when the Drill instructor tells you to and keep your mouth shut about it.
The Air Force, another branch of the service taken over by the Homo’s.
Look for a rainbow ribbon to show you participated in a homosexual event
We have that already—look up the Army Service Ribbon
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/context/employment.html
“Employment of Homosexuals and Other Sex Perverts in Government (1950)
Interim Report submitted to the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments by its Subcommittee on Investigations pursuant to S. Res. 280 (81st Congress). A Resolution Authorizing the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments to Carry Out Certain Duties...
General Unsuitability of Sex Perverts
Overt acts of sex perversion, including acts of homosexuality, constitute a crime under our Federal, State, and municipal statutes and persons who commit such acts are law violators. Aside from the criminality and immorality involved in sex perversion such behavior is so contrary to the normal accepted standards of social behavior that persons who engage in such activity are looked upon as outcasts by society generally. The social stigma attached to sex perversion is so great that many perverts go to great lengths to conceal their perverted tendencies. This situation is evidenced by the fact that perverts are frequently victimized by blackmailers who threaten to expose their sexual deviations...
Conclusion
. . . It is the opinion of this subcommittee that those who engage in acts of homosexuality and other perverted sex activities are unsuitable for employment in the Federal Government. This conclusion is based upon the fact that persons who indulge in such degraded activity are committing not only illegal and immoral acts, but they also constitute security risks in positions of public trust.”
Sample Eval:
“TSgt Happyhands has shown much improvement in handling workplace issues. He no longer puts his hands on the derriere of my civilian secretary, and, no longer refers to female airpersons who refuse his advances as ‘stupid dyke biotch’”
I thought the current Enlisted Performance Report format basically covered that with blocks for covering work performance, education/training, fitness, personal growth and community/base involvement. The current bullet format being Action Impact Result. This, along with documented feedback being how you separate the douche-rockets from the actual superior performers.
Not only do I now have to write what my airman did to improve himself, his workplace, and so on, but I now have to write how he improved his workplace even more?
“In a news release, the Air Force said airmen would be graded on how they contributed to a culture of “dignity and respect”.”
Back in the 60s, there were two classes of EMs: RAs, and USs and NGs. No one cared about much about their dignity and respect just whether they could do their jobs. Things seemed to work well under that concept. Today it seems we have a blended patchwork of normal people and homos and are more concerned with keeping everyone happy rather than doing what the army does best: BREAKING THINGS AND KILLING PEOPLE. It has become a quote from a Clint Eastwood movie: what do you think this is, some kind of encounter group.
That was written in 1950.
If anyone wrote that today they would commit them to an insane asylum.
“It is the opinion of this subcommittee that those who engage in acts of homosexuality and other perverted sex activities are unsuitable for employment in the Federal Government. This conclusion is based upon the fact that persons who indulge in such degraded activity are committing not only illegal and immoral acts, but they also constitute security risks in positions of public trust.”
Yes, doing security clearance inquires, that was one thing looked for. The entry question was: “did the individual engage in or approve of unusual sexual proclivities”. A positive or non committal answer required further examination of the witness. Today it is a hiring enabler.
Does the USAF have Zampolit (aka Equal Opportunity Officers) like the US Army does?
I’m referencing this news story in context to my question.
Army: Don’t say Christmas
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3104900/posts?page=17
Don’t say Christmas.
That’s the message that was conveyed to a group of soldiers at Camp Shelby by an equal opportunity officer from the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute, according to a soldier who attended a recent briefing.
“It’s unbelievable that the Army would ban ‘Christmas’ like it’s a bad word,” said Michael Berry, an attorney with the Liberty Institute, a legal firm representing the unidentified soldier.
Two weeks ago, a routine meeting was held at the Mississippi base with various leaders of the 158th Infantry Brigade. During the meeting, they discussed an upcoming Christmas football tournament. The equal opportunity officer immediately objected to the usage of the word “Christmas.”
Encounter group
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-groups
A T-group or training group (sometimes also referred to as sensitivity-training group, human relations training group or encounter group) is a form of group training where participants themselves (typically, between eight and 15 people) learn about themselves (and about small group processes in general) through their interaction with each other. They use feedback, problem solving, and role play to gain insights into themselves, others, and groups.
The concept of encounter as “a meeting of two, eye to eye, face to face,” was articulated by J.L. Moreno in Vienna in 1914-15, in his “Einladung zu Einer Begegnung” (”Invitation to an Encounter”), maturing into his psychodrama therapy. It was pioneered in the mid-1940s by Moreno’s protege Kurt Lewin and his colleagues as a method of learning about human behavior in what became The National Training Laboratories (now NTL Institute of Behavioral Science) that was created by the Office of Naval Research and the National Education Association in Bethel, Maine, in 1947. First conceived as a research technique with a goal to change the standards, attitudes and behavior of individuals, the T-group evolved into educational and treatment schemes for non-psychiatric people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.