New weight program.

[DCCS Keith Wilbee]

I hear its suppose to be on the streets the 18th. Anybody have an advance copy for me?

[BMCS Gary Chalker]

Are you referring to the alleged new "Physical Fitness requirement" that is "in the works" for everyone, or a "revision" to the old program? Don't have much info on either...sorry! :(

[BMCM Steve Cantrell]

Word I'm hearing from my XPO who is at the CPOA right now is that the only change to the current weight program will be that you will get weighed twice a year now and the results will be put in People Soft. If you are over the MAW, you will be required to work with your unit wellness rep to develop a diet and exercise plan to get under the MAW. Not much of a change. I thought we would be going to a mandatory physical fitness program with mandatory minimum standards for all. We do mandatory PT at my unit 3 times a week from 0730-0900 and the results have been really good.

[ETCS David Kroll]

Heck, My unit has no work out facilities. We can run or ride our bikes, but in the summer it gets too hot. In years past, we had YMCA memberships, now this year, I can't get them. My XO says he is trying and I'm sure he is but I don't have the feeling that my priority is his. I'm going on three months of trying to get 2 memberships to the YMCA. Oh and by the way, the group and MSO I'm co-located with both have multiple memberships.
Talk about frustrating.
Dave

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Well, Steve it appears that your XPO was correct. ALCOAST 329/04 is on the streets and does the following:

1. Semi-annual weigh-ins
2. Development of annual basic fitness plan
3. Command sponsored voluntary work out periods (one hour three times per week)
4. A designated UHPC and alternatives
5. Mandatory work-outs for those personnel over their weight limits

Sheeshhh....
I thought we were finally going to devote some time and energy to mandatory physical fitness training. This instruction is nothing more than a paper tiger...full of bluster, but no teeth.

When are we going to take physical fitness seriously???

[MKC Art Bailly (ret)]

I think we should have some kind of a work out schedule BUT what are those desks jockeys thinking or should I say not thinking? A work out schedule might be great for shore units but what about our underway units without work gear on board? Where would we store it if we had it? What about safety issues while underway in heavy sea’s? And for all of us that are on ships we all know since Sept. 11th 2001 our ops schedule does not allow time for use to work out. I’m on a 225’ buoy tender and we work very little Aton any more. We do more cruise ship escorts, security patrols and boarding’s then we work buoys. And with theses optimally manned cutters between working buoys and doing boarding’s and trying get sleep between your last mission and your next watch who even thinks about working out??? Either our op tempo needs to change or our people are going fall apart and retention will become an even bigger problem then it already is. How can anyone expect to retain good people when they get to their first unit and see how little time they have for their selves and their family? How much more are we going to throw at our people before we start cutting back in other areas? I see that straw that broke the camels back coming real soon. What do you all think?

[DCC Mitchell Penneau]

I agree with you Art, with all the high speed opp tempo, mostly on the cutters there is very little time for self and family. I do not think that a mandatory PT program is a good thing. The problem in todays Coast Guard is we have all these programs, but most of them are not followed. If like at my unit they don't even do the weigh once a year, so now it is twice a year...What a joke. Before we start a new program or policy lets at least adhere to the one we have first: confused:

Also if we do go to a mandatory program, then what..tell a station sorry PT this morning can't fix your boat?????? :eek:
Next who is going to be required to the PT, everyone or just those in the field. Is the Commandant going to do it three times a week, what about MCPOCG?? District commanders are they going to be exempt, how about HQ personnel???

I say use the policy we have now enforce the standards, if your over you weight limit then you go on the program get to the required weight or be discharged....Everyone gets weighed in on there birth month end of storry..Hold the HS’s accountable to do that..Simpel just enforce what is in place now end of story. :D :D :D

[BMCS Joe Wright]

Now I am not one to jump on a negative bandwagon but I must agree with what you guys are saying. Keith, I don't know if you remember, but this was a hot topic when you and I went to the CPO academy and I got beat up pretty bad over disagreeing with the chance of making a mandatory PT program because it will be unfair for underway units.

I don't think this policy was thought all the way through...and if it was they are being way to "gray" in their guidance. First - can someone define "normal working hours"? I am on a 175 and it is normal for us to be working from 0530-2000 depending on the time of year. So does that mean I can keep my guys after we pull in at 2000 because a twelve to fourteen hour day is “normal” for us. Second - If we are to give the entire crew three hours of work out time a week (and that is a blind number because it does not take into account preparation and clean-up)...do we alter our underway schedule to accommodate this? Do we extend an already extremely arduous seasonal buoy deployment schedule a couple of days because of PT?

I think they are leaving this new policy open for interpretation, which is very dangerous in my opinion. First – it doesn’t solve the current problem. If you leave room for interpretation you leave room for inconsistencies. Second – it sends a message that policy in general is open to interpretation and that is not a good thing.

I am all for a PT program…I support it, look forward to the very strong positives it brings, and I DO BELIEVE WE CAN MAKE THIS WORK. I am just saying this policy is weak and lacks guidance. If underway units are to alter their schedule…say so. And what are the “hours” we should be allowing our members workout?

And everything I talked about so far is for the people NOT on the weight program........how in the world are we going to make time for them.....leave them back? There's incentive!!

I am sure the company response will be - you have to adjust, their will be an initial growing pain, etc., etc. In a sense you can say they just dumped another mission on our laps and expect us do the best we can with what we’ve got! More things to do in a day but there is still only 24 hours in a day......sound familiar? :confused:

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Joe,
I agree...I think.

I want to see an instruction that states that regular workouts are mandatory for everyone. Shore units should have no problem scheduling them, and afloat units can do so during inport times. Hell, afloat units can do it underway if they are creative.

And, why are we tailoring the workouts to individuals? Tailor the workout to already existing PQS requirements. Let's ensure that our people can run that mile and half, and do those situps and pushups.

I believe we keep hedging around this issue because none of the senior officers or enlisted (us) really want to do calisthenics in the morning. Shame on us.

Physical fitness is as important as maintenance or training. Its about time we recognize that fact.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Physical Fitness and Standards? Absolutely! This Instruction? WTF?

So if I read the ALCOAST correctly, we are institutuing a physical fitness standard that consists of weigh ins twice a year, one more than we are required now. We do not have any kind of standards to meet except the weight. I have to give my command, a copy of my workout plan to consist of 3 days of cardio and 1-3 days of weight training. That's It? Are you kidding me? Who was the DA who decided that?

If I am overweight, then my command will send someone to babysit (I mean supervise) a one hour workout 3x each week. I will be tested on my physical fitness (if I am overweight) with a 1.5 mile run, push ups and situps, yet it doesn't say anything about how fast we need to complete that run or how many pushups and situps we would be required to do.

Personally, I workout five days per week now, plus play at least one game of soccer per week in a league. All this is done on my own time, 0530 at my local YMCA. Even with all of that, I do feel that I am out of shape and could use an incentive or two to crank out some pushups and situps.

[AMTC Matthew Boyd]

At least they’re doing something! I agree that it doesn't make sense to only make those who exceed their MAW to workout (and it's not 1 hr. a week it's 1hr 3 times a week) but you also have to look at how it would impact each unit. At a large Air Sta such as Clearwater, if you made it mandatory you’re talking about loosing 1400 man-hours a week from the hanger deck. It's hard enough keeping our ageing aircraft bravo as it is. Just my 2 cents.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

How do the other services make time for mandatory workouts and still get their work done? I think our CG culture just isn't used to the idea.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

When I went through A School, it was a Joint Services School located on an Army Post. The Army Students were on the quad between the barracks at 0500 Monday through Friday. The Marines were PTing at 1500 Monday through Friday. While attending C-Schools, the Marines shifted their workourts to 0500.

I guess we would have to start the duty day a little earlier to accomodate the mandatory workouts for the personnel not within their Max Allowable Weight.

Matt, I re-read the message and caught my error on the number of supervised workout days.

[OSC Donald McClain]

How do the other services make time for mandatory workouts and still get their work done? I think our CG culture just isn't used to the idea.

I have to agree with you Senior - I don't think it's a matter of finding the time, I think it's an issue with the CG culture. First we had a weight standard that was enforced based on the unit - some enforced it and some didn't. There was no other requirement - no work out program - it was left up to the individual. At least now - the CG is trying to address that issue. So now we have a weight standard and a start to a physical fitness (somewhat) program.

Maybe instead of the majority complaining about how screwed up the new program is - how about trying to work with it. You might be surprised with the actual outcome of having everyone come in at 7am instead of 8am to work out together. We are all in a leadership position - so let’s lead and set the example.

Here is one I'm sure I'll feel the wrath about - Matthew mentioned something about losing 1400 man hours a week if everyone at the A/S started working out. How many man hours are currently being lost when Bob/Bill/Jim/Jane/Mary decide to take that 10-15 minute smoke break every 1-2 hours.

Don't get me wrong - I smoked for all most 15 years - but don't you think that allowing our people to work out without any type of negative feedback or attitude would be better?

[PACS Steve Carleton]

I think the CG culture needs to shift on this (my kinder and gentler way of saying we need to stop screwing around).

The other services have Physical Fitness Standards ingrained in their culture, they make it mandatory on their evaluation and promotion eligibility systems

[MKCS Jon Menze]

A lot of you are talking about what the other services do. Well here is something to look at. The Airforce, I found out, not to long ago did away with their weight program and went totally on fitness and appearance. I do beleive that we need to be looking at the fitness more than weight issue. My only question is how to do it. Shore units are easy to figure out but what do we do for the people underway that do not have the equipment to work out underway?

[SKC Raymond Kurtz]

Don, good point about the smoking. There's not much we can do about this, if the command is willing to provide the smokers with a nice place to smoke out of the weather, well obviously they aren't too concerned about the health affects.

Why on earth does this need to be a major issue anyways? Give us an hour to exercise ON THEIR TIME which does not include the time it takes to get to or from the gym, require us to maintain logs (something I have been doing anyways) to keep us honest. Pretty simple I think.

Or am I looking at it from too much of a simplistic point of view.

[DCC Mitchell Penneau]

I guess I will get slamed for this, but I am against mandatory PT. I as with many in the CG are not over weight, I am fit as any and am able to complete my job.
If someone is over weight then yes enforce the standard. If someone is on a boarding tean then yes there is a standard and it has to be enforced. I am not on a boarding team,not part of a MSST,not over weight, and don't look out of shape. I can complete the PT test with no problem, even though I am 45 years old, and that is saying a lot because there are many in the service that can not make the standard.
I agree there should be an annual PT test, if you can not pass then you should have to work out untill you can pass it,just as if your over weight, get on the program untill you make the standard.
But mandatory PT is a huge waste of man hours, during the work week, and I for one work over 50+hours a week and I am not going to come in on my time to complete more work hours doing PT.

[MKC Art Bailly (ret)]

I agree we should require that our people be physically fit but what does that mean?? Well to me I’d much rather have a guy or gal that misses the 1 ½ mile run by 30 sec and is at his max weight or 10 lbs over that can pull a 200 to 300 pound person out of the water or be strong enough to lift equipment in their day to day job then someone that is at their IDEAL weight and can run that mile and a half is record time and can do all the sit ups and push ups but could pull an adult of any size out of the water or need help lifting something because their not strong enough. Don’t get me wrong we need to keep our weight in check but are our weight standards Just a little skewed?? My ideal weight is 180 and my max 213lbs. The 213 should be my ideal not the 180. If I were to weight 180 lbs you’d be able to slide me threw the crack in the door. And who’s brilliant idea was it to figure out body fat. You take 2 measurements with a tape measurer to tell how much body fat a person has on them. This is real accurate right. Not. Maybe its time to revise our weight standards to modern times and use technology to figure this out more accurately. I’m all for being at a reasonable weight but send me 2 people to fight a fire or pump water out of a sinking boat and 1 is at his ideal weight and a smoker and the other is a naturally big guy may 10 lbs over weight I chose him to be my back up darn near every time over the other. And right now when were are already short on people to the point of waiving service wide exams and throwing money at people to come in and get a guaranteed school out of boot camp were implementing another one of those program that will result is kicking members out creating a bigger gape then we already have. What ever happened to using common sense before doing something?? Have the powers that be for got the mid 90’s when sifter and high year ten-year came out?

[BMC Ken Gouge]

A note on the other services, having been in one.

The plain and simple point is that they don't have a day-to-day job unless they are in a support role, or there is a war.

If they are at a support unit PT can be added to the plan of the day. If they are a ground pounder the fitness and physical preparation IS THEIR JOB!

The difference for us, at least at operational units or those that directly support them, is that we have a job, and it's not a 9-to-5er. Every workout or mandatory PT program I have seen started seems to fall by the wayside at the onset of SAR season.

More to follow, "WS-III will be secured in 5 minutes..."

Ken

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Many of us have alluded to the fact that we need to distinguish between weight and physical fitness. I agree! I am in my weight limits, but I do not feel that I am as physically fit as I could be, it doesn't hurt to get a little motivation going.

I say put a division/unit workout basketball, football whatever into the plan of the day 1-3 times per week. Not only does it improve physical fitness, it promotes team building and bonding.

Shouldn't we all promote a healthier lifestyle? Demonstrate by example, if I expect my people to maintain a healthy lifestyle, it certainly doesn't look good if I am standing there talking about on the smoking deck does it? I talk about my exercise routine which makes me get up at o'dark-thirty, and I am at my desk and working before all of my staff.

Make it part of the culture! Make it a part of your personal culture! Lets stop making excuses and make it happen!

[MKC Art Bailly (ret)]

Steve:
Do you have any ideas for those of use on cutters?? Not sure how we can play baseball, football or basket ball on the buoy deck unless we were to not carry buoy’s and chain with us when we work buoys. I’m not saying that we cant make time to work out but what type of workout things can we do when we barley have room to bring along equipment/parts to do our real job. Aton, SAR, MHS, fisheries, exct.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

I did a deployment on a British warship once, and they did daily workouts on their flight deck by simply using aggressive cahlistetics. There was one guy on the boat in charge of coordinating and leading the sessions. Jumping jacks, short sprints, push-ups, sit-ups, etc.. It was an excellent workout with no extra equipment and very little space.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

What do you do when you are not underway? What about a calisthetics program on the buoy deck?

[MKCS Jon Menze]

Steve and Dennis,
On the buoy deck? I would not want to do that stuff there. I do care how much time they spend cleaning it. That place is nasty no matter what. As for doing work outs underway, I wish I had the time. Between watchs, work that has to be done and drills, it doesn't leave a whole lot of time to do much else. The whole minimumlly manned thing throws a whole new wrench into things. Another thing is what do you do during the winter? They can be pretty harsh at times for those ships that are up north. Are we going to expect them to go out on deck to work out still? I do believe this is something we need but it was thrown out there so fast that there wasn't much thought put into it. It was also put out like it was going to be an actual plan not something for the member to figure out on their own. I believe that this plan is the same as we had before with a few exceptions.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Believe me, I am in agreement on throwing this program out there ina half-a**ed fashion with little or no teeth.

Perhaps I have the luxury(?) of being at shore units and do not realize the difficulties of shipboard life. I do however, think that if we as Chiefs get creative, the issue of workouts and physical fitness times, locations, etc. can be worked out.

Additionally, if the CG demands a physical fitness program, then they will need to fund things like equipment purchases/gym memberships etc. in order to make it work.

I just think that there are too many excuses as to why we can't do something and not enough creative solutions to correcting the problem.

[MKC Art Bailly (ret)]

Steve I would like to extend and invitation out to you to join us on a underway trip so you can see what it is like to be underway then maybe you'll understand what the sailors of the CG are talking about. Just by the way your option is I would bet that you have very little if any sea time. Especially since 9/11/2001. As an example of a normal day underway we are currently underway for a SAR case. We are looking for an overdue airplane in this harsh Alaskan environment. As a result of transfer season we still are short on qualified watch standers. Today we are launching 2 small boats and using the cutter to conduct shoreline searches and the boats will be out till sunset (approx 1830). The boat crew also are qualified watch standers so when they get back to the cutter eat chow they will have watches to stand. 1 of the boat engineers is also a aux watch and by the end of our first 24 hours of underway time he will get maybe 4 hours of sleep and then back up at it again. So when would you like for him to work out?? I think we need to have one of those things called a reality check.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Art, you gotta stop posting when your in the middle of operations! You get all angry and wound up!

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Since it seems that once again, I have rocked the boat from the comforts of my land based billet (pun fully intended).

I will be more than glad to get underway and attempt to get workouts in -- I did it as a non-rate on a Polar Roller. There should be enough space somewhere to bang out push ups, situps and a few jumping jacks.

Poll time -- since the new policy takes effect on Friday, who is above the MAW and will be required to conduct supervised workouts?

[MKC Art Bailly (ret)]

Dennis thanks for your incite and your right I do kind of get worked up when were underway when I’m acting as a look out for a sar case Admistering test, conducting training and standing EOW watches. Sorry Steve. To answer Steve’s question I had all my guy’s fill out the Physical fitness plan and I have 2 guy’s out of 7 that do not meet their weight standards. Were heading off to the yards for a few months so hopefully they can get in the routine of working out and can find a way some how to work out when were underway as long as were not rocking and rolling to much. After all safety first.

[DCCS Brett Wickett]

First off, hello all. Amazing what you can find out here in cyber world. Anyway, I think alot of people on here have alot of good ideas, but it also seems that many have no ideas but many complaints. I guess I fall on both sides of the fence at leaset at times. Yea, I am on land right now, just got here from a 270 in KW, also done a 180 in Ak. and a river tender. I work out on a regular basis, and yes it is difficult underway, but it is doable. Can you become a body builder while underway, nope don't think so. But I have seen some real creative things out there, watchstanders between doing rounds, doing situps and pushups, myself as an EOW doing push-ups and situps in Main Control, many times just getting in a fast 15 minutes or so on a treadmill after the mid watch. Does it suck....yep it does, but I think the wanting to do it belongs to the member, we can make up excuses as to why we don't want to, those tend to be easy. But the hard part is to make up the dedication to make it happen. Not busting anyones balls here but if you have time to sit and write you 2cents on this issue and complain because you don't have time to do anything......well.............and yes I am over my max weight by 45 lbs, but I am under the fat, SO lets help our members come up with ways to do things and even join them......there now I'm done.........LOL

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Now that October is here and units are weighing members, just curious what units are finding as far as members over their maximum allowable weight standards?

At my unit, we had 22% over their MAW. Of those who were over their MAW, about 50% were also over their fat percentage. This does not include reservists, we haven't weighed all of them yet.

Just curious what other units are finding and what the CG as a whole is finding. Any input?

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

We had the same figures. Roughly 22% over and 50% of those over the body fat. We lost all of our reservists in the "Great Reservist Shuffle of '04" but our precentages would have gone up. The strange thing is that I don't see my guys as "fat". I have a couple of big guys who are carrying a lot of weight. Now I've seen "fat". I'll be courious to see how my guys pan out after the bloodwork and dietician visits.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

First, it is good to see some names of people I have known in days of yore. Next, I am over my MAW and under my Body Fat. I think it would be a good idea to review the whole MAW thing and maybe make it soley based on body fat %. Next, I like the mandatory workout thing. My personal motivation is almost there and the mandatory thing gives me the push I need. As far as the instruction goes... This is not the world of micromanagment that so many of us have gotten used to. This is "guidance" and it is up to individual commands to excercise their discresion to implement a plan that works for them. If this plan had the "teeth" that so many are asking for, then it would tie the hands of commands and create chaos. We don't have a gym at my unit (ANT, ASHORE), but I secured permission from the COCO to get a gym membership using AFC-30 funds with this instruction as my fuel. When I get back from hunting next week, I will start the mandatory workouts. Oh yeah, so long to trop hours. We are now creating time during our work day to excesize. As far as afloat units go. Been there, done that. Glad the instruction gives some latitude. Do the best you can. Be creative.
Thats my 2 cents.

Jim

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

18% overweight at this unit.

[ETCS David Kroll]

My entire crew was within weight standards! Now thats cool!

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Put this down in the "you learn something new everyday" category. I called PERSU to ask why one of my people wasn't given his SRB on the anniversary of his re-enlistment and the answer was...........because he's on the weight program. He'll get it as soon as he comes off.....a $2900.00 incentive to diet.
I wonder if they plan on doing the same thing to people who get busted at mast or go on performance probation ?

[OSCS Jimmy D. Belcher]

Senior I looked at your post and my eyes about dropped out of my skull. 2,900 dollar incentive to diet. I looked in the manual for guidance on this and could only find one item. Page 2-4 para 3 states a [B]command can request authorization from Commandant to hold a persons probationary period in abeyance for a specified period of time. By doing so the Service can avoid the unintended consequence of penalizing a member (e.g., withholding an advancement or payment of a bonus) who through no fault of his or her own is battling a medical condition that makes weight loss challenging or impossible. There is probably some other guidance in that 3000+ page Personnel Manual

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

The possible interpretations of the writting on that is fairly liberal......anyone on a diet will tell you that weight loss is challenging. And when exactly does no fault of his own kick in. It's time to Blame the Donuts. I think that with the inclusion of dieticians into the new weight standards we may see more people who suffer from some of these "medical conditions." As for "unintended consequences"...........they must have intended to withhold my guy's bonus because they intentionally did. I don't know what lawyer wrote all that double speak, but I wish he would explain it to me, my guy, or our yeoman. I'm not a Doctor, but I think that anyone suffering from an actual medical condition has weight loss and bonuses fairly far down on the list of things to worry about. I have to believe what they are writting about has to be with very serious and extremely rare circumstances. I appreciate the research, but as it stands, I think the easiest thing to do in our case would be for the guy to lose the weight.

[OSC Thomas Jackson]

I am unsure how they handle this new weight standard. For almost 20 years, I was told that I was well under my weight limit and that I could get close to 200 lbs. Now I never wanted this, I try to keep my weight between 175 and 180. During the last weigh-in, I was at 185 and I was told that I am now at my max weight. The person did not take any measurements, he just weighed me after he looked up me up on the computer. I know that I am out of shape, and am trying to get motivated. Usually, the only thing that can make me run is a bear coming up from behind or a beer truck with a case hanging out the back end ahead of me. :) I also have to agree with Art. It is hard to work out if the ship is small and there is not ample room. I have watched people jog on the helo deck on the 210 I was on. One member was jogging and we took a roll. He ended up falling down and spraining his ankle. Before I joined the CG, I was in really good shape, I did not work out on a regular basis, but I did "Manual Labor" (i.e. construction, hauling hay, cutting wood, etc). There are some units out there (i.e. buoy tenders) where the members are working their butts off and doing a lot of manual labor. Then there are people like me who are now desk jockeys, and do no manual labor at all. I need to get on a program, but I don't think that the person on the buoy tender may be required to, because he/she are actually doing physical labor on a regular basis. There needs to be different standards depending on what type of work you do. That's my 2 cents (now worth 1/4 cent due to inflation).

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

The biggest problem with your plan would be that those people doing the "hardest" work would be held to a higher standard. The people who have the easier schedule and access to bigger and better equipment would be given more leeway because they ride a desk. For the most part, people on land have more flexibility when it comes to creating a workout schedule and sticking to it. And none of us can really blame work for our physical condition.
I would rather go to an appearance based weight standard. Presents a fit, trim appearance in uniform.......good to go. One of the problems with the standard that we have, is we get people with Popeye's wrist you can in turn have Bluto's belly. And the CG has to take some responsibility for the way things have become because they make uniforms to fit the bodies of people who are forty or fifty pounds over their maximum weight.

[OSC Thomas Jackson]

Senior Chief,

I guess what I was trying to say is that the people doing the manual labor probably already meet the weight standard. If the Coast Guard wants to do this right, they should have fitness tests once a year. The people who are overweight and cannot meet the basic physical requirements should then be placed on a workout schedule. This would solve two problems: 1. The people who need to workout will, because they will be placed on the Weight Program; 2. It will motivate the people who do not work out to start their own program so that they are not placed on the weight program. The way it is now, you can fill out the exercise plan stating you will do this and this, but you are not really accountable for following it unless you are over weight.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I'm prior service and would like to see standardized physical fitness applied service wide. But that alone won't solve the problem, it would create more. One of my trimmest/youngest members is also my weakest. He has a hard time toting a sixty pound battery where as my big guy tosses it around like it's nothing. I see the system that we have now, as far to strict with some body types and far to forgiving with others. Again I have two big solid guys who exceed the standard. I see others whose waist is much greater than their inseam, and are deamed good to go, with room to grow. If you buy your pants with a 26 inch inseam and a 42 inch waist....in my eyes, you're fat....I don't care how big your wrist is.
If we're worried about health issues we should go to a straight body fat standard. If we're worried about sharp military appearance, where is the other end of the spectrum ? Why aren't we looking for a minimum weight ?
If we went to a standard based strictly on your ability to do your assigned billet, I'd be thrilled. And please, call me Stu.

[OSC Thomas Jackson]

Stu, nice to meet you. There are definately problems, and I guess there are no easy fixes. One thing that really bothers me is when I was stationed at NMC, one of my subordinates was told that he was over the weight limit. Now here's the problem, the person taking the measurements at NMC was a YN who stated that the mbr did not make weight. The mbr went to Tracen Petaluma medical and the HS said the mbr was over the limit, but not by as much as the YN stated. He also stated that the YN was following the set standards set by the Coast Guard, and that these standards were not always accurate. Right now, I have a Warrant Officer who is in charge of taking measurements. I wonder if everyone taking measurements has had training on the proper method of deciding how much body fat the member has and if someone has double checked that the Coast Guard is doing this correctly.

Tom

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Tom,

Do you know what the policy is on this? Do you know how to correctly measure someone? If not, you need to educate yourself. You're the Chief...make sure your people are being taken care of.

Example...if a member of your unit is weighed/measured by the CWO and they don't think he/she did it correctly, you should do it yourself and see what it is. If there's a discrepency, then you need to talk to the CWO about why you got one result and he/she got another. If you still have problems, run it up the chain.

Weighing/measuring is clearly outlined in the policy and the District wellness coordinator provides training, if needed.

[OSC Thomas Jackson]

Senior Chief Smith, Thanks for the information. The problem was at a previous unit not the one that I am now. But I will research this.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Well here's one that I've never dealt with and now it's come back to bite me.
We tried to do everything the right way during our last weight-in, went right by the book. Calibrate scale...check. Ensure that the height dohickie is mantained at 90 degree angle....oops. Seems as though we overlooked this little step and were robbing a 1/2 to 3/4 of an inch off of some people's height. It didn't change their weight enough to matter, but it does change their body fat calculations. We also ran across an old page-7 that established someone's new maximum weight, that was never entered into People-soft, and since we no longer mantain unit PDRs...........
FYI. For the people close to your maximum weight, be aware of your height, look for changes, and try to remember any page-7 that you have signed regarding your weight. This might make us look foolish, but it could hold up your pay, your school, your transfer, or end your career.

[MKC Art Bailly (ret)]

Well I’ve waited awhile to make a post here to try a few things out. Underway it’s pretty darn hard to find the time space and energy to work out after long days. In port is a pretty easy thing to do. Instead of driving to work I run. It took me about 20 min at first and now about 10 min. I ran the mile and a half in 10:53, did 38 push ups and 40 sit-ups in 1 min, and the 10k run in 1 hour and 10 min, ( not bad at 41). But then their were those in their late 20’s early 30’s that couldn’t even run the whole mile and a half run. 1 person (under the max weight by a long shot took over 20 min. Now you tell me that is right. Yes every weigh-in I just barley make my weight. Most people don’t think I’m over weight especially when you look at those that Stu referred to as the ones with big wrist and neck’s. The things Stu say’s makes a lot of since. Kids under their weight but could pull them selves out of the water if their life depended on it. We talked about this at the CPOA and many of us felt that instead of a weigh in, how about every 6 months EVERYONE is required to pass the PT test and if you cant pass that then you weigh in. Maybe that might put a fire under some people to work out, even those who make their weight. I am in support of the work out program and the only problem I have with it is doing it during the workday in trop hours. My MK2 and I have been getting up at 5 am to run 2 miles almost every day before the workday starts. Its great in-port but underway is going to be the real challenge.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Attended a "roadshow" with the detailers on Monday. Was told that in the first half of this year, there have been twice as many people separated for weight issues then in all of last year. I guess that the mission of removing the fat folks is working. It makes me wonder when the law suits will start.

[BMC Chris Gempp]

There is a person at Sec Seattle who is being discharged for weight issues, they were not afforded the "rights" to exercise the three hours a week but the person is not fighting the issue at all. Who is wrong in that situation????

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Good question. I personally wish the Coast Guard would look more toward physical fitness than weight. I would much rather have some fat strong person pull me out of the water, than have some thin person drag me alongside the boat. Additionally, people do have different body types. That is considered somewhat in "frame size". I believe that a physical fitness standard is a much more measurable and fair way to deal with people.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

I don't think that anyone could make the case after being discharged for weight issues. I think the government covered themselves with policy issues. And I don't see anyone who was discharged make a strong enough fight before the discharge to try and start one afterwards.
I had a cousin who was put out of the Navy Years ago for weight. He was 11 pounds over and wound up with a stomach virus two days before his re-weigh-in. He lost 13 pounds and was quite upset. He was then told that the standard had changed and he was still over. They would give him a second chance to lose more weight, but he declined. He wanted out. I think most people who are being put out fall into that category.
Let's be honest, the CG weight standards aren't that hard to meet. People that can't are probably unable to do so medically, which saves them, or just not willing to. Is it REALLY the three hours that the CG wouldn't give the guy time to excercise for that put him over the top ? If he REALLY wanted to stay in, he could have forced the time issue, or done it on his own time.

[BMC Chris Gempp]

[Let's be honest, the CG weight standards aren't that hard to meet. People that can't are probably unable to do so medically, which saves them, or just not willing to. Is it REALLY the three hours that the CG wouldn't give the guy time to excercise for that put him over the top ? If he REALLY wanted to stay in, he could have forced the time issue, or done it on his own time.[/QUOTE]
Senior,
Your very correct and I would not argue that fact one bit. I don't know the entire story and what I heard was just that, something heard, I may be wrong in bringing it up and I dont know the entire story, but the person just gave up and said "let me out". Makes you think what that persons thought are..

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Chris, I don't think you can ever be wrong, bringing something about. If we all stopped discussing things where would we be ? And we rarely have the whole story. Bringing it up might get someone with more information to come forward. It could also solicit other points of views on the subject and get other people thinking.
And you're right again. Why would someone just give up ? My cousin was recently married and his wife was not adapting to the service way of life. He was on subs and deployed for six months at a time where phone calls were non-existent, or at least few and far between. He had to make the choice between a career and a marriage. No one will know if someone like that made the right choice for years after the fact.
But why would our Coasties look at being over weight as an early way out ? And if we start seeing alot of people from a certain unit or area "opting" for it.....what is the CG doing ? People don't get over weight over night. Why wasn't something done before some of these people got to a point of no return ?

[BMC Chris Gempp]

Stu,
I agree that something shold have been prior to the overweight coming to a discharge. I know the person had twins approx 2 years ago and I guess they never recovered from that. I really dont have a straight answer about it. The part the bothers me is that they "rumor", for lack of a better term and I hate using that, is that the person was never given enough time to workout. There is ample equipment here but the person has to definitly take the time to exercise.

[BMC John Phillips III]

Does anyone agree that weight program should apply to all government employees? I personally do. Maybe not so strict as our military standards but I have seen some pretty darn obese govt workers. The sad part is when some of your troops are borderline and receiving page 7's then they have to look at someone that is making upwards of double their salary living high off the hog.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

The problem with that would be that Congress would have to set a standard for fat. Would would you suggest, no one is allowed to be fatter than their pay check ?

Chris this is one of those sad stories where I really wish I had all the details. It is a CG policy, so there are many ways to work within it's scope to save a good person. She could have bought time with care for newborns. That could have gotten her two years. She could have quit smoking. That alone buys her six months. If she had worked for me and I thought she was worth saving, I would have found a way.

[BMC John Phillips III]

Senior,

I am not saying for congress or any elected officials, although I think your fatter than your paycheck plan is a good one! I am talking about any government employees that work for the military. Does that sound feasable?

JP3

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

If I thought that the underlying reason for the weight program was the overall "health" of the individual members, then I think it could be a good idea. However, once again, and especially in the civilian sector, I think the lawyers and the ACLU would have a field day. I think in the military sector, the real driving force behind the weight program is not health or fitness, because there are other policies that would have a greater impact. I think the real driving force behind that one is simply appearance. How do we look in uniform when we are out in public. When I was at the CPOA we had a few rather large Chiefs. This was shortly after MCPO Welch took over and he paid our class a visit. A few months later the new policy came out. I am quite sure by the look I saw on his face when he saw the size of some of the Chiefs in my class, that the wheels started turning then. Of course, this is simply my opinion.

[BMC Chris Gempp]

Chris this is one of those sad stories where I really wish I had all the details. It is a CG policy, so there are many ways to work within it's scope to save a good person. She could have bought time with care for newborns. That could have gotten her two years. She could have quit smoking. That alone buys her six months. If she had worked for me and I thought she was worth saving, I would have found a way.[/QUOTE]
Senior,
I agree with what your saying. I am sorry that I dont have all of the details, my apologies, if the poerson is worth saving I would do the same and help them to lose the weight, but how do you go about it if the person really doesnt care?

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

JP3, Congress would have to get involved if we were going to make a policy that we intended to enforce on civilian employees.

Chris, you can't save someone who doesn't want to be saved, and I wouldn't waste my time. There are plenty of people who need our help and are looking for it. Why spend time on someone who doesn't care ? We're in the CG, throw them a heaving line. If they grab it, pull them in. If they don't, let them drown.

[BMC Chris Gempp]

Senior,
Good policy. I like it and it hits the nail square on the head.
Thanks