Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Reaper
Sir:
Since we have taken this track, if a male rigger has to be able to perform at a certain level as validated by a PT test, why do female riggers have a different scale?
R
|
You'll get no argument from me. They should not have the same MOS. If we are going to use the MOS to define tasks, conditions and standards with PT being a standard then give them a different MOS or change the standard for all. I absolutely disagree with different standards for the same job and that also goes for senior officers and NCOs who hold a MOS and can no longer meet the physical requirements of the job. I think SF started out on the right foot by having a higher standard for the APFT but I think we screwed the pooch when we started changing the standards of performance based on age. If you are a Major and running a B-Team and are supposed to be able to deploy to set up an area command and link up and run with your subordinate A-Teams you had best be able to meet the physical standard set for that younger Captain or you should not be running a B-Team with that mission. I am sure you can think of a lot of other examples. 18As are 18As and age should not define the requirements but duty position should. When you no longer can lead from the front and have to push from the rear your MOS should change and the requirements to include the physical performance standards should change also. I am sure some creative personnel managment type could come up with different 18 series identifiers just like we do with ASI, SSI, etc.