What have past MCPOCG's done for the CG?

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

We are about to install a new E-10, so I thought this might be a good time to discuss the accomplishments of that particular position. What have past MCPOCG's done for the Coast Guard? What definable benefits, positive changes, or "good fights" have they contributed to?

I want this to stay a positive thread. If you have issues with past E-10s, don't post them here. None of them are members and won't be able to defend themselves.

However, if you can't think of anything of value that has been accomplished, feel free to say so. That perception, in itself, might be worth a discussion.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

That's a good question Dennis. We've kind of talked about this in another thread a few months ago.

My answer...I don't know. I guess that's where I have a little trouble. Shouldn't I be able to think of something? I assume that the MCPOCG has been involved in the People Plan/IDP's and all of that stuff, but I can't say that for certain. I know that they speak on Capitol Hill about CG issues, but I don't know to what extent.

Is "NO News" good news???

[DCCS Brett Wickett]

That's funny Deane, as I was reading the start of this (withought reading your post) my first thought was I have no idea what any have done. I have never really thought about it much I guess, but I cannot think of anything. So I guess they are doing fine.

[LT Arthur Nelson (MKC) (Ret)]

First, I think it would be positive for the Coast Guard & Chiefs if prior & present E-10's became members of this board.

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

Ok, now we need to think on this. I feel the same way, at first thought I came up blank. Nothing stood out in my mind.

Should I have to think on it that hard? Shouldn't something come to mind with just a mention of MCPOCG?

If I sit a moment I can think of some issues with MCPOCG Patton, but they were before he was in that position.

[LT Arthur Nelson (MKC) (Ret)]

Two things come to mind with MCPO Patton; revised marking system & CGC Mako.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

I'm of the same mind as most of you-- I can't think of anything that any of them are known for. Now, if that is a common occurence, why are we so worried about who fills the spot? It doesn't seem like they do anything of note anyway!

[ASTC Ronny German]

You have to look at the position of the MCPOCG from a different point of view. Look at the policies that were created during each of their tenures and see how it effected the enlisted work force as a whole. The value of the MCPOCG's position is the ability to influence the people who create policies, and quite frankly, I think their doing a heck of a job taking care of the enlisted work force.

Since I've been in the Coast Guard, I've met each of the MCPOCG's as they made their rounds at my different unit's. To me it seemed that MCPO Patton did the best job interacting with the crew, and sincerly liked meeting the "average coasties".

[DCCS Todd Holcomb]

I remember a few things I researched during CCTI that MCPOCG Calhoun did that I thought were significant, "Bender Blues" is the one that stands out in my mind right now, I could go through my book and find a few more.
What have any of them done where it automatically makes me say "Oh, I remember when MCPOCG so and so did blah blah blah" I can't think of anything. I think, or at least I hope, they do a lot of behind the scenes work that has a positive impact on every enlisted member at some time or other. But let's not forget that in the mighty EPME manual it says the MCPOCG keeps the Comdt informed on all issues pertaining to the well being of CG personnel ( that's not verbatim, but you get the gist :D ) not just Enlisted. So maybe they have done a lot for the Officer's. I honestly don't know off the top of my Knot. :confused:
Anyway My .02

[BMCM Deane Smith]

I know out here in PACAREA, the PACAREA Commander sends out message traffic periodically informing the troops of new policies/issues/vision/whatever. The RFMC's send out force notes periodically. Why don't we hear more about what our MCPOCG is doing? Maybe the MCPOCG should send out an "ALCOAST" or "MCPOCG Notes" periodically letting us know what's going on. Maybe we would gain a better appreciation for the position and what they are doing for us.

Maybe that's just impractical...I don't know. It's just a thought!

[YNC Paulette Gough]

I'm not really sure what they have done for the enlisted. I always thought they were more of a sounding board for enlisted issues for senior flag officers. I know they make the rounds with the Commandant and do the meet and greets, but policy-wise who knows? Maybe the past E-10's wrote or changed enlisted policies for the better, and we never knew because the Commandant announced the new policy and assumed credit for making the decision. I think it's more of a silent partner deal - but then what do I know? I only have 3 years at sea. Maybe I can go TAD on the MAKO and get my permanent pin too. ;)

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

The most senior enlisted person in the CG does a job "behind the scenes?" So, how do you measure their success?

If I were to put this on my resume

"...senior enlisted person in the United States Coast Guard...can't really point to any significant accomplishments or tell you why I got paid more...I was more of a behind-the-scenes kind of a guy..."

I doubt that I'd get hired by anyone.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Can I join the choir ? I can't think of a single positive thing either. And Arthur and Paulette have alot more tack, restraint, and professionalism, than I do.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Well then, what would we like to see the E-10 do? What would be a good year for our most senior enlisted person?

[BMCS Burt Ford]

I agree with Stu, I missed the tac boat too but I will take a stab. I dont know either. Didn't Vince spearhead these new ODUs? I also think is the Commandant can take the time to send messages of BZ, Holiday and others, our Senior enlisted could do the same. According to CGCENTRAL, his last speech was Dec 2004.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

What does an "E10" do? HMMMMMMM, that is a good question. I think that most of the MCPO-CG's have had significant influence behind the scenes.

The argument could be made that they should be more "vocal" about what they do for the enlisted workforce.

Other than seeing Master Chief Welch on about 4-5 different occassions, I'm not sure that I can point to any one thing that he has done, the argument could be made that he doesn't communicate his work as well as others.

I remember seeing Master Chief Trent probably 1-2 times, again, not exactly sure what he did or didn't do except travel with the Commandant.

I saw Master Chief Lloyd only once, and other than being able to tell you that he was the MCPO-CG, I couldn't tell you what he did either.

[Pause, while I take cover behind my barricade] I think that MCPO-CG Patton was probably the most visible "E10" and therefore succesful the Coast Guard has ever had (at least in my career), I attribute that to a couple of things:

a. his personality
b. his teamwork with Admiral Loy

I know that he did plenty of things that upset people and may have been done to advance/promote him individually, but he did get things done, he communicated well and he was visible on many levels. Really, isn't that what we want? Visibility, Communication, Someone who appears to listen? Of all the MCPO-CG Bios/Stories, he was the only one that mentioned he "wanted" the job from the first time he met MCPO Calhoun. I have not run into any Coasties who have said they want to be MCPO-CG after meeting a sitting E10. Is that a problem? There are plenty of Coasties that fondly remember the interaction they had with Patton even if it was meeting him only one time.

I think that it is imperative to have outstanding teamwork between the Commandant and the MCPO-CG, if that is not happening, then people like us sit back and Monday Morning Quarterback the job.

Now, what do we ant the next sitting E10 accomplish? I don't know of anything specifically, but I do want someone who will commmunicate what they are doing, and be more visible.

[OSC David Nolan]

Has anyone thought to invite the current or incoming MCPOCG to this forum? I know that the OS FM is on Fred's place all the time guiding junior personnel on some issues, why not ask the top enlisted person to belly up to the table for a discussion?

Dave

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Steve, I am at my third unit since the new MCPOCG took over and he has never been to any of them. Something tells me he won't be on this rock anytime soon either.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

It would be great if the MCPOCG would be participate in this forum. It would be great if 2000 more Chiefs would belly up as well. I'll not hold my breath for either one.

I don't know that it is a good thing to strive to be the E-10 from early on in one's career. In order to make that happen, you would need to shape yourself into the Commandant's expectations by being a career CMC. Wouldn't it be better to choose an E-9 that is suited for the times, rather than one that makes himself/herself suited for all times?

I'd like to see Mess participation become a priority with the new E-10. I'd like to see an individual that clearly states that he/she is not happy with the state of the Chief's Corps and then insist that it change with clear definable objectives. I'm getting tired of hearing our most senior enlisted leadership say "well, that's up to the local Mess..." Let's define who we are and insist that our membership live up to it.

[BMCS Jim Madsen]

Was the MCPO-CG involved in pushing ODU's through? I think so.
I would also venture to guess that by the look on MCPO-CG Welch's face at my CPOA Class, he had a major roll in the new twice a year weigh in and fitness plan stuff. Choose for yourself whether that is positive or not.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

I'd like to see Mess participation become a priority with the new E-10. I'd like to see an individual that clearly states that he/she is not happy with the state of the Chief's Corps and then insist that it change with clear definable objectives. I'm getting tired of hearing our most senior enlisted leadership say "well, that's up to the local Mess..." Let's define who we are and insist that our membership live up to it.

Dennis...you couldn't have put it any better than that. That is exactly what we need and exactly what I would be looking for also. Well said.

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

Well, we all know that Popular is not allways positive.

I would like to see a more vocal MCPOCG. Well, that's not fair, he may very well be vocal we just don't know it. But that is a point too. As for the MCPOCG joining this board. I agree with Dennis, it wont happen. If it is hard for him to take the time to send out information more often then how would he have time to "Chat" with us here on this board. I'm sure the man is busy, I'm sure that he has many things going on. However, throw us a bone to chew on once and a while.

[YNC Paulette Gough]

I'd like to see Mess participation become a priority with the new E-10. I'd like to see an individual that clearly states that he/she is not happy with the state of the Chief's Corps and then insist that it change with clear definable objectives. I'm getting tired of hearing our most senior enlisted leadership say "well, that's up to the local Mess..." Let's define who we are and insist that our membership live up to it.

I totally agree with Dennis. MCPO Welch was at my after-initiation dinner at CG Academy. He was in town anyway for a meeting and we invited him.....Anyway I guess I expected to be magically inspired by some words of wisdom about the Mess and the Chief's corps, but he focused on what the CG was doing in the wake of KATRINA. I'm not saying that what the Coast GUard men and women did down there wasn't worthy of public praise and discussion, but that particular occasion I was hoping for some honest discussion on where the Mess was headed and how I could make it stronger following my initiation.

Right now - I have heard tales of Chief's messes throughout the Coast Guard who are sharply divided on the issue of Warrants being part of the mess. When I asked about it, I was told that it was up to each chief of the mess to decide. What if the chief of the mess doesn't want Warrants in, and the other chiefs in the mess do? If we had some decision making and policy guidance from the top - it wouldn't be an issue and the mess wouldn't be as divided. Also - there's the issue of CCTI. I thoroughly enjoyed mine and thought it was well done. Again - it's up to each chief of the mess to decide how/when/if CCTI is conducted. Some units are having a "charge book" only CCTI and no court, and some messes are doing it the old fashioned way. Frankly - it's confusing. I like it the old-fashioned way personally, but my point is that we should all do it the same way. It will unify us and make us stronger.

So - I guess I would like the future E-10 to step up and make policy decisions for the enlisted and the chief's corps. He/She is there to lead us - maybe it's time they started doing just that.

[MSTCS Tom Gentile]

I guess that's why they're are called Commandant Instructions, not MCPO-CG instructions. Enlisted personnel don't have the authority to set CG policy. What the MCPO-CG, Area/District CMC's and so on have to do to be successful is to positively influence the policy makers to take the needs of our personnel into account when deciding policy and striking a balance between People, Unit, Coast Guard.

Having had the benefit of working in the Commandant's Office when ADM Kime and MCPO Lloyd were at the top of their respective food chains, I can say that MCPO Lloyd was in every meeting/discussion that had to do with personnel issues, providing his input. Only a handful of people ever get see that side of policy discussions. It would be a good thing if the MCPO-CG could find an effective means to communicate some of that dialogue to the Chiefs network so it's aware of how we can contribute to the cause from the field level. If anyone comes up with a good idea, please share it with me so I can implement it when I finally become the first MSTCM to be MCPO-CG!
Oh yeah,...... I gotta make E-9 first don't I? :cool:

[BMC Ken Gouge]

Tom,
Thanks for the insight. I figured that was what happened, and I know any enlisted person worth his/her salt probably doesn't want it getting out that they spend that much time in meetings with officers :rolleyes:

I know that many if not all of the speeches given by thehigher-ups are posted on the intranet. Would there be a legal way of having the minutes of those meetings forwarded to the chiefs corps? Maybe through the gold badges or something. I know if we saw more of how the "laws" were passed we might be able to provide our input in better context to the MCPOCG or have a better idea of what input is needed when.

I think we should bring back the khaki's and beards! Who do I talk to about that...

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Ok answer me this. I just rcvd an email from an MCPO that said MCPOCG wanted himn to send out the new CCTI theme.


This motto is a combination of some previous class’s mottos

“Wisdom to Follow, Courage to Lead”

Thanks

How much time would it have taken to see this come directly from MCPOCG?

I know dennis, dont yell at me just something to ponder.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Officers don't set policy in a vacume. Before the next Commandant's Instruction hits the street, there will have been solicitations for input and discussions from anyone knowledgable in the particular subject. Among that input will be that of the MCPOCG.

What I wonder, though, is how the E-10 makes up his mind as to what stance to take while in the discussion phase? Does he advocate what the enlisted workforce wants or what he wants? If it is the enlisted workforce, how does he know what they want? If he advocates what he thinks is best, then we really can't say that he represents us, can we?

Think about it. Enlisted people have no voice in who is assigned to the E-10 position, and we have no way of gauging the E-10's success in the job. Yet, the MCPOCG is the most senior enlisted person in the CG and is, by definition, our advocate.

It just seems to me that the MCPOCG position, and perhaps even the CMC positions, do more to be advocate for senior leadershp than they do for the enlisted workforce.

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Very well said Dennis. I agree witht everything you said. If we had any say in who got the job, would it become a popularity contest or could we have an election? I guess all enlisted or just Chiefs?

[LT Arthur Nelson (MKC) (Ret)]

I would be interested; at your units if you pool your crew "show of hands who can tell [me] the name of our MCPO-CG and what his job is."
Not a negetive question, just curious how many troops out there really know who the senior enlisted member is and what his job entails. I would expect[hope] majority of E6's would, but what about E5's and below?

[BMC Ken Gouge]

It just seems to me that the MCPOCG position, and perhaps even the CMC positions, do more to be advocate for senior leadershp than they do for the enlisted workforce.

If you have ever noticed, the gold badge that may or may not make an annual visit to your unit probably doesn't get SN smith in for a sit-down and ask "how can we make this better fo you?"

I think that is why the unit command chiefs have to be kept in the loop from above, be generous with the info they get from above, and then make sure any the info flows back up the hill. If your Command Chief isn't communicating with the Gold Badge THAT is where the ball is dropping. The unit CC hears things, and can solicit thoughts from the deckplates.

If the MCPOCG showed up at your unit once a quarter, most of the crew would probably spend more time looking at those three stars than they would providing important ideas...

[BMCM Deane Smith]

This thread has really got me wondering & Dennis I agree with everything you've said. Now that you're retiring you're starting to make much more sense...go figure.

Anyway...here are 2 quotes from the MCPOCG (no hyphen) website:

The MCPOCG is the principal advisor to the Commandant of the Coast Guard on quality of life, career development, work environment and, personnel matters affecting enlisted personnel; it is just as important to ensure the Commandant hears from "Team Coast Guard."

Suggestions and concerns of Coast Guard enlisted personnel may be submitted to the MCPOCG where they will be evaluated and forwarded to the Commandant with appropriate action recommended.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

I've always made sense, Deane. You're just getting better at listening.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

The MCPO-CG, the E9(sp), is probably too busy to join these discussions. It shouldn't stop the other MCPO or CPO's on the MCPO-CGs staff from joining in.

I think it would benefit alot of people if the RFMC's joined the rating forums at military.com discussion groups.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Well, I'm still seeing some things differently than some of the rest of you.

If the MCPOCG is the advocate for the senior enlisted, why did one of them generate messgae traffic the reverted E-7s back down to the junior enlisted ranks ?
And as for visible, and vocal.....? In my twenty years in the CG, I've had my unit visited by the District Admiral, about twenty plus times. Had the COMDT come four times. And saw one MCPOCG. I had another one visit the Mess at my parent unit once,......he stayed for all of about ten minutes.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

I don't believe that the MCPOCG is too busy to engage in a discussion forum or an occassional email. It's not like he's going to be diluged with emails from thousands of Chiefs. If nothing else, this forum has demonstrated that not many Chiefs actually care enough to speak up.

Is he afraid that he'll get corned into a position that is contradictory to the Commandant? Is it really that awful to disagree publically with one's direct superior, even if he is the Commandant?

And, I don't like having to go thru the CMC network to get my opinion and thoughts to the E-10. Why does the process have to be so watered down? Again, it's not like a lot of Chiefs are going to do so anyway.

We are in the age of home PCs and instant communication. Why not cut out all of this antiquated filtering system, and talk to each other directly?

A few years back, a boot SA emailed the Commandant directly and inquired as to some career advise. Now, the Admiral was polite and referred him to those more able to serve his needs, and we all had a good laugh at the young man's "inappropriate" behavior, but the act did demonstrate that anyone has the time to respond to an email. Based on my own experience, you can respond to quite a few in a relatively short amount of time.

But, maybe it's just as well. I don't know that I really want to pull back the curtain and see that the wizard isn't as powerful as OZ would like you to believe.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Lt Art Nelson (MKC) stated on the first page, Two things come to mind with MCPO Patton; revised marking system & CGC Mako.

Art, MCPO Patton was a CPO when the marking system was revised 20+ years ago. I believe the first time those EPEFs came out was duing my second tour on Lorsta Attu Island, 1983. If I'm not mistaken, the roots of the EPEF was one of his dissertations on his way to his doctorate.

Dennis, I believe the MCPO-CG might be busy is because neither you nor I have a clue of their schedule. I'm sure when Vince was MCPO-CG, he was an emailing fool ... which is good. Vince made it a point of keeping people informed ... much more than his predcessor.

I also ran through my mind to see which MCPO-CG had a positive impact. Nothing leaped to the forefront. I went to the negative impact ... one leaped forward in my mind and the only article on the web was this (http://www.aug.edu/~libwrw/Articles/mariner.pdf).

Personally, I think the MCPO-CG should be here. Does that mean he'll be actively participating? No. Should he participate in every discussion? No. I'm sure there are topics that would interest the MCPO-CG, this one for instance.

I wonder if the CG has managed to snatch all the CG-related materials from the DOT computers ... for historical purposes. I only mention this because when I was searching for MCPO-CG Rick Trent, one of MCPO-CG Patton's testimonies was on the DOT website.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

I'm not sure I liked the link you provided. None of the individuals named (the MCPO, the potential-ancient mariner, and the author) are members of this board and can explain and/or defend themselves.

I'm not going to delete it under my own reservations, but I ask that you consider whether its inclusion is appropriate or even beneficial to this disucssion and the board's integrity. It's one thing criticizing an institution (the MCPOCG position). It's quite another to criticize the man.

[MSTCS Jerald P. Motyka]

Okay, time to offer myself up as fodder yet again...

How in The Ancient Diner's name (that would be the most senior "M" Chief in the Guard!!), can you discuss the POSITION of MCPOCG without touching on the man that held the position?? There is NO way that you can say that the MCPOCG from '76 to '80 did a great job while the guy that held the job from 90-94 sucked without calling out individuals!

I mean, how do you talk about the senior enlisted regime from 98-2002 without saying that Vince Patton did a good job or a bad job. Sure, it may have all been driven by the guy wearing the four stars on his collar, but it still calls into light the performance the guy with the biggest anchor out there.

Oh, and Joe? Please consider the source. Bill Wells is a very smart man... but he is nothing but a VERY strongly held bunch of opinions looking for the next victim that doesn't agree with him to unload upon. I don't know if I would post that linky either...

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Jerald,

There are those that dislike MCPO Wells, just as there are those that dislike SCPO Dennis Noble. Both are historians and both write about the Coast Guard. Lifeboat Sailors and The Rescue of the Gale Runner are works of Dennis Noble that I have read. You can bet money that there are those at SW 2nd St who disapproved of things Dennis wrote. There will always be praise and condemnation of historians works, depending on your own personal bias and knowledge base.

I guess you could get the cite's that MCPO Wells used and read for yourself and make up your own mind on the actions of that particular MCPO-CG. I'll bet MCPO Wells still maintains copies of his cites.

Art,

MCPO Bill James was the OinC of the Mako when MCPO-CG Vince Patton received his cutterman's device. Bill is still active duty and I'm sure he can set you straight on the circumstances surrounding the MCPO-CG's TAD.

Dennis,

I'm not asking anyone to defend what MCPO Wells wrote. I posted the link for those who never heard of that incident. Just because the incident wasn't positively stellar doesn't mean it wasn't part of CG History, and specifically MCPO-CG history.

[MSTCM C Stevenson]

How in The Ancient Diner's name (that would be the most senior "M" Chief in the Guard!!),....
C'mon Jerry, say it with me:

"There is no more M."
"There is no more M."
"There is no more M."

There is only Sector.

There is NO way that you can say that the MCPOCG from '76 to '80 did a great job while the guy that held the job from 90-94 sucked without calling out individuals!
And there is no way to establish that any one of those individuals sucked unless you have all the facts. You certainly won't get them here and Joe's comments do well to point that out. Thanks, Joe.

I mean, how do you talk about the senior enlisted regime from 98-2002 without saying that Vince Patton did a good job or a bad job.
Because the E-10, whomever it may be at the time, doesn't have as much influence over or interaction with the senior enlisted regime as you might think. There are countless senior enlisted networking efforts underway at any given time, many of which improve on or sweep up the uglies of enlisted world. Happens every day at district and Area levels. Many of those efforts wind up as Area or even CG-wide policies with little to no input from the E-10.

Short answer: It's the tail waggin' the dog. It works pretty well and it's completely natural.

[MSTC Michael Schmidtke]

My only reply to the specifics of the dates that were given....how can you, Jerry, say that those MCPOCG were not doing their job...or what you would say that they didn't do their job? Your slamming MCPOCG Patton? I would be safe to say that he has done more for the service than any other MCPOCG.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Again, this thread wasn't meant to speak about any specific people. All I am asking is, what positive things have the MCPOCGs done for the service? If you have positive examples, please tell me. If you have negative examples, please keep them to yourself. If you don't have any examples at all, that is indicative of an institution that is either ineffective or does a poor job of communication. That's worth talking about.

If we keep criticizing people that haven't invited the discussion, I'll delete the thread. Let's act like Chiefs instead of gossiping old ladies.

[MSTCS Jerald P. Motyka]

I never intended to "call anyone out", I was just using the dates and names mentioned as examples. But in the spirit of the original question, if a person says, "Nothing good came from the MCPOCG's office during the 1952-1956 time-frame," you are personally calling the non-existant MCPO a slacker. (How are those dates?)

It all comes to personal perception. I might like the guy in the seat right now, but my fellow chief on a 110' may think he doesn't do enough for the cutter fleet. The PAC next to me might think that the next person that sits in the big chair is great for raising our visibility, but the AMTCM on my other side hates the way they are gutting the helo fleet.

I don't see how this does any good.

(And MCPO Stevenson, they'll pull my shrimp-fork from my COLD, DEAD HANDS!!) I know we've gone back to the old concept of "W" that they had in the late '60s... but it was a feeble attempt at poking fun at the Ancient Albatross and others... Alas, I failed. ;)

[MSTCM C Stevenson]

If you don't have any examples at all, that is indicative of an institution that is either ineffective or does a poor job of communication.

No, it's indicative of a lack of awareness. Meaning members are unaware that 1) what comes out of the E-10's office is directly proportionate to what it is fed, and 2) small, quiet changes occur virtually every day. Examples could include updates to the CPO Academy curriculum or finding money to pay for new E-9 billets.

Both make a big impact over the long term, but the average member here doesn't know/hear about them. It doesn't mean the institution is ineffective or that comms are down. On the contrary: It means the E-10 and his network choose not to bore you with details because - frankly - it's not your end of the business.

Again, it's completely natural: An incredible cross section of anchors feed the E-10 office. They are the unsung heros (7's, 8's and 9's) pushing paper and policy between districts, Areas and obscure HQ offices. Those are the ones who bend the ear of the 10 on a daily basis. Those are the ones that affect change (sometimes through the E-10, sometimes not) based on what is happening in the field.

Given those realities, it might be more accurate to ask something like "What have past senior enlisted groups (or members) done for the CG?"

[MSTCM C Stevenson]

they'll pull my shrimp-fork from my COLD, DEAD HANDS!!

Keep it close. When you're 90, broke and your hands begin to go cold, you could sell it on ebay to stay in medication.

BWA ha ha ha...

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

The good or bad of a MCPO-CG's tenure can not be measured as a net sum game, we only get the highly publicized versions, on in the case of the link I posted, a hot-button issue.

We don't know what issues they encouraged or what issues they discouraged. The MCPO-CG is a background player, like alot of Chiefs, the masses don't see the results of what was stopped. The only way for us to know is if the MCPO-CG publishes what they done, and if they publish, it will concentrate on the positive. Publishing what they stop would only embarass those that supported the now defunct issue.

After all, in the twenty plus years of the EPEF, how many have seen negative comments, or wrote negative things about themselves, on the brag sheets.

The web remains the easiest way to get information out to everyone. Most have access at home and certainly all have access at work. One question I would ask is Why doesn't the MCPO-CG use the website for maximum coverage?.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

It means the E-10 and his network choose not to bore you with details because - frankly - it's not your end of the business.

I'm not looking for details. I'm looking for a list of accomplishments that the E-10 can pin on his hat. And, of course its my business.

I agree with you that things get accomplished every day by unsung heros. But, the E-10 is a very visible, very prestigious position that seems very disconnected from the majority of the enlisted workforce.

As far as those "feeding" the E-10 information, I assume that you speak of the silver and gold badges. Why do we need that network to feed information? Why not allow us to send it directly?

[BMCS S. D. Peters]

I can say Master Chief Patton did a lot for the small boat community. He used to run around HQ with a manikin dressed up in a Dry suit, PFD, Boots, Helmet and the rest of the survival gear with price tags attached. I actually watched a video of it when I was at OIC/XPO school in 2000. He spoke at the class and explained how funding from congress works and what he needed from the fleet to make it happen. I know he was instrumental in getting the funding for the survival gear we have now.

[BMCS Burt Ford]

Dennis i understand where you're comming from but you have struck a nerve with this board. I should say the reason it went the other wasy is because no one can remember anything, or at least not much. Steve has given the best example of what has been done. The MCPOCG websitre should be agreat outlet to let people know what is going on. Or better yet CGCentral. Cant take more than a few minutes to say "I have been working on.........." "The commandant asked me to help with.......". Long Break!

On another note though, I liked the article Joe linked. Interesting that the out going Ancient Mariner had also been RFC. I worked for him, smart man.

[MSTCM C Stevenson]

I'm not looking for details. I'm looking for a list of accomplishments that the E-10 can pin on his hat. And, of course its my business.
The details (small policy changes, updates to existing programs, rebuilding old ones, etc) are the accomplishments. They're not prominent or pin-worthy because they are just the business of the day. Based on what I see/hear/get on a regular basis, that is most of his day.

WRT details being our business: It's good stuff to know when/if there is time. It's unlikely we would have time to eat, sleep, use the head if details were provided to the masses in some kind of regular trickle down. Two words: Information overload.



But, the E-10 is a very visible, very prestigious position that seems very disconnected from the majority of the enlisted workforce.
I move through the day trusting he and his minions will keep me and my end of the workforce clued in on a need to know basis. The trickle down (and up) seems to be healthy in my area as is the unofficial networking. I expect little from the man. He'll wave the flag and address CPO/enlisted workforce issues in the way he thinks best. I expect more from his players.



As far as those "feeding" the E-10 information, I assume that you speak of the silver and gold badges.
In part. There are just as many badgeless ones (course writers, RFM'S, program people, LDC and Academy types, etc.) working his agendas.


Why do we need that network to feed information? Why not allow us to send it directly
I hate like hell to fuel drama and speculation, but I'll risk these suggestions:

On why we need the network:
- Because the network is good. Usually.
- Because the network keeps it manageable and organized by scrubbing out the detail work, which allows the most pertinent issues to fill the 10's day.
- Because managing things at the lowest level is still good business.

On sending feedback directly:
- Perhaps he doesn't want to receive it that way.
- Perhaps he trusts the network to do it's thing.
- Perhaps he understands there is no good, well managed mechanism in place (yet) to receive and track the issues.

Again - Those are educated guesses. I don't know him well enough to speak for him.

Final thought and I'm outta here: When the President speaks, I don't hear him. I hear his advisors. When the President doesn't speak, I have to assume he is busy listening to his advisors.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

When the President speaks, I don't hear him. I hear his advisors.

What if you don't hear him or his advisors???

[MSTCM C Stevenson]

What if you don't hear him or his advisors???

Then it's likely I'm either 1) Out on the motorcycle or 2) Chasing my wife around the house.

[MSTCM C Stevenson]

Seriously - Tactful barking up the chain works. By barking, I mean less a growl, more a persistent "woof." Keyword: Persistent.

Everyone has a boss.

[BMC John Phillips III]

I didn't read this entire thread, but I read the last three pages. I have to agree with BMCS Endicott about the gossiping old lady syndrome. Please leave that at Military.com.

As far as positive input goes, I can site two times in my career that the MCPOCG (I dare not call him E-10 or the ladies will get me) has positively influenced me.

1. MCPOCG Trent came to Group Saint Petersburg when I was a non-rate and said that if anyone had their name on the MST A school list, they might as well pick another rate. (Apologies in advance Jerald), Well I was young and impressionable and thought that MST would be a good career choice for me, but after serving 2 years on a 210 and having a child on the way, I decided to go back to my original plan of being a Boatswains Mate!

2. While at the Chief Petty Officer Academy, MCPOCG Welch spoke with us on a video teleconference. While I can't remember everything he said, I will say I was very impressed with him. He almost made me want to be the MCPOCG someday. Ironically, MCPOCG Welch was a fast advancer.

Also, I am certain that if anyone wanted to know what the MCPOCG was up to, all they would have to do is ask. He seems like a pretty straight forward guy. If you haven't found the appropriate avenue to speak with him, perhaps you should consider attending the CPO Academy where you can speak to him as part of a non-attribution Mess.

[BMC Ken Gouge]

I have had the chance to be on a few of the same misions as MCPO Welch while I was at Sta Monterey and he was OIC of the Sockeye and they had the offshore coverage of the area. Not only did I take a disabled FV in to the harbor for him after they towed it in, I also took a tow from his XPO.

This stood out in my mind because it was while MCPO Welch was doing something elsewhere in preparation for becoming MCPO-CG. I have known several OIC's that would not afford their XPO's the same opportunity. The trust in your subordinates, and in the training you and others have given them, shown by letting them run the show is one of the best examples of leadership I can think of. Granted, it's a little different in these days of cel-phones and push-to-talk, but it still takes a great measure of trust.

On a different note, I think that publicizing at least an example of the day-to-day activities of the MCPO-CG would do some good in generating interest by the junior enlisted of someday holding that position.

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

Would it be unreasonable to put a match the MCPOG to accomplishment type question on the EPME tests? Might require folks to do a little digging into the job of the MCPOG.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

I didn't read this entire thread, but I read the last three pages. I have to agree with BMCS Endicott about the gossiping old lady syndrome.

I suspect its not gossip when you have the cites and can read for yourself and see if you come to the same conclusion.

I haven't read MCPO Wells' History of the Coast Guard Chief but I'm sure it is filled with cites and his own opinion.

Your free to choose whatever you wish to assign a gossip label or absolute truth label.

No one, to date, has refuted MCPO Wells' paper. At least not with some verifiable cites. I see alot of attacking the messenger.

I'm sure all those CPOs who went to college are happy to hear their papers were mere gossiping old lady syndrome, and not scholarly work.

[BMC John Phillips III]

This stood out in my mind because it was while MCPO Welch was doing something elsewhere in preparation for becoming MCPO-CG. I have known several OIC's that would not afford their XPO's the same opportunity. The trust in your subordinates, and in the training you and others have given them, shown by letting them run the show is one of the best examples of leadership I can think of.

Ken, I agree, another thing I picked up at the academy was this quote, "It's not what they do while you're there, it's what they do when you're gone."

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

But, the E-10 is a very visible, very prestigious position that seems very disconnected from the majority of the enlisted workforce.
I'm with Dennis on this one. I'm an E-8 about to make E-9 and I couldn't tell you what the last message I heard coming from the MCPOCG's office was was. If I'm not hearing anything, what are the odds of my non-rates hearing anything ? I don't want to throw stones either.....but if I'm not hearing a message........maybe there's no message to be heard. And we already rely too much on electronic means of communication. If I have to sign onto his website to see what's new.......it can't be that important. I get e-mails all the time, from people losing keys across the base, to changes in the menu......and nothing form the circle of trust. "Very disconnected from the vast majority of the enlisted workforce....." I'll go with that.
Take a quick pole at your unit.....find out how many of your enlisted people can name the COMDT and the MCPOCG. I'll lay odds that more can tell you who the COMDT is. Then see how many Officers you have to ask before one can name the MCPOCG.

[MSTCM C Stevenson]

Would it be unreasonable to put a match the MCPOG to accomplishment type question on the EPME tests? Might require folks to do a little digging into the job of the MCPOG.

Good one.
You would do well to copy n' paste that to MC LaCumsky, Mother of E-PME. She digs that kind of feedback.

[SKCM Linda Reid]

Jay Lloyd got the crap out of the CCTI.

"Ancient Diner" - :D - good one!

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

Good one.
You would do well to copy n' paste that to MC LaCumsky, Mother of E-PME. She digs that kind of feedback.

Maybe I'll use that for my E8 EPME sign off.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Jay Lloyd got the crap out of the CCTI.

And which crap would that be?

I had a discussion with a MCPO before we went to his wife's CCTI in 2000, my first CCTI. I had known the MCPO and his wife since they were PO3s. He could not identify the crap that people were railing against. He even mentioned that when someone was asked about the crap, no one had personally witnessed any ... but they relied on the scuttlebutt as the God's honest truth.

I could not identify the crap either.

All the initiations I helped organize from 84-86 on Governors Island NY didn't have the crap I've heard people complain about.

[SKCM Linda Reid]

I was referring to the drinking, swearing and egg-throwing.

[BMCS Don Zoll]

I was referring to the drinking, swearing and egg-throwing.

Sooo, you mean the good stuff.

[ETC Beavers]

No swearing at the CCTI? I would have been thrown out a long time ago if that was the case. :D

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

No swearing at the CCTI? I would have been thrown out a long time ago if that was the case. :D

I went through my CCTI this past October. Good thing I didn't know about the no swearing clause.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Here is a DRAFT copy of MCPOCG Welch's upcoming testimony about our 2007 budget. It's long, but worth the read. I think that it shows what he's working on on our behalf.

It's too long for one post, so I'll spread it out over several.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Greetings all. I have attached my written testimony for the upcoming hearing season FYI. Please understand that it has to go through several clearing stations but I don't have any problem with you forwarding as long as it is understood to be a draft. Feel free to use any of the points as you wish.
VR/FAW

F. A. WELCH
The Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard
2100 Second St., S.W.
Washington, DC 20593
(202) 267-2397

[BMCM Deane Smith]

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
UNITED STATES COAST GUARD
STATEMENT OF
THE MASTER CHIEF PETTY OFFICER OF THE COAST GUARD
FRANKLIN A. WELCH
ON THE FISCAL YEAR 2007 BUDGET AUTHORIZATION
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
MARCH 1, 2006

INTRODUCTION

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee. I am honored to appear before you for the final time to discuss my views regarding the Coast Guard’s fiscal year 2007 budget request and to provide you with my assessment regarding the current state of our workforce. Since this will be my last scheduled appearance before this subcommittee, I feel that it is important to present you with information that will be useful for assessing the morale and general well-being of our service members and their families, along with my views regarding the challenges that they face.

As this subcommittee is aware, 2005 was an exceptional year in terms of mission performance for the Coast Guard, and equally exceptional, albeit demanding beyond precedent for our workforce who served so valiantly in support of our many missions. The selfless dedication of the Coast Guard workforce resulted in a record-high year for seizure rates of illegal drugs and migrants, seizing over 330,000 pounds of cocaine and interdicting over 9,000 migrants. Nearly 4,000 Coast Guard personnel responded to the dire needs of Gulf Coast communities in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, directly rescuing more than 24,000 people and assisting in the multi-agency evacuation of 9,462 more. While the aforementioned results gained national praise and publicity, the unsung efforts of our pollution response teams, aids to navigation units and personnel support staffs were equally Herculean in the wake of the largest natural disaster in American history.

Petty Officer (PO) Jessica Guidroz of Station New Orleans said it best regarding the sentiments of our workforce during the Coast Guard’s unprecedented Hurricane Katrina response efforts. After seeing a lady and her baby that PO Guidroz had previously assisted appear on the evening news, Guidroz said:

“There she was – the lady with the baby. She was in Houston now, and she looked like she’d showered and her kid had on clean clothes. That moment is when it clicked. Here was someone we had actually helped, and it fell into place that we were doing something that really mattered, something really good.”

Tangible mission results and positive publicity coupled with an intense internal organizational focus on our people have led to another profoundly positive year of workforce statistics. I am confident that with the continued legislative and budgetary support of this subcommittee that the U.S. Coast Guard will continue to perform in ways that surpass every American taxpayer’s expectation; including my own.

RECRUITING

Successful workforce growth begins at our nation’s recruiting offices. We have 372 of the finest representatives of our service and our core values serving in 100 such offices throughout the country. In fiscal year 2005, our recruiters had an annual active duty mission of 4,110 people, yet they achieved 4,127 accessions. As indicated, we exceeded our active duty mission by a small margin and achieved 80% (752) of our reserve mission of 950 accessions.

Fiscal year 2005 was also an impressive year for recruiting as we continue our efforts to further diversify our workforce. As a result of our Strategic Metropolitan Area and Recruiting Territory (SMART) national recruiting initiative, community outreach and the personal commitment of our recruiters, the Coast Guard achieved the second highest percentage of active duty minority accessions (35.4%) and the third highest percentage of female active duty accessions (15.5%) in the history of the Coast Guard.

RETENTION

The current retention rates within our officer and enlisted communities are 93% and 88.2%, respectively. Even at the first-term enlisted level, we are retaining nearly 70% of every enlisted accession that our recruiting offices are providing us. These statistical facts verify that our recruiters are seeking and securing high quality people and that our service is rapidly becoming a “service of choice” for young America. Recent career intentions surveys indicate that our workforce is more satisfied with their compensation and the Coast Guard’s overall commitment to missions than ever before in the history of the survey.

Considering the current hectic pace of operations and every expectation that the pace will continue, I view the Coast Guard’s sustained retention success as key metrics of our Commandant’s people-based initiatives. We have made significant investments towards enhancing the personal and professional development of our entire workforce and I am certain that we are now seeing a return on those investments by way of securing a more positive, professional and stable workforce that is as committed to the Coast Guard as our highest echelon of leadership is to them.

One such example of workforce investment is our current tuition assistance program. The Coast Guard program is considered to be the best of all of the armed services. As a result, we have seen a 300% increase in tuition assistance utilization over the course of the last three years. In fiscal year 2005 alone, we invested $13.6 million directly into the continuing education of our workforce. We have also seen dramatic increases in the output of our educational facility in Oklahoma City. In fiscal year 2005 alone, the Coast Guard Institute processed 7,536 transcripts, 17,074 degree plans and 8,981 educational assessments. The number of assessments that were processed represents a 200% increase over the demand in fiscal year 2004. Clearly, this is an important program to our workforce and we intend to fund it at levels that we can sustain within our budget base.

TRAINING

Every Coast Guard success is the direct result of leadership, training and empowerment intermixed with the creative genius that we are well-known for. However, central to that theme is training, and for good reason the Coast Guard has placed a renewed emphasis on training our service members to better prepare them for success, particularly in the key leadership arena.

I mentioned last year that we established a senior enlisted command master chief course to better inform and prepare our top enlisted performers to serve in these critical leadership positions. As a result of that course, I currently have over 30 applications to fill half as many vacancies in the summer of 2006. This represents an approximately 300% increase in qualified applicants than what a typical year affords. We have also partnered with the Department of Defense to expand our leadership development opportunities beyond the confines of the Coast Guard training system and vice versa. As the armed services become more joint in our operations, shared resources and total force understanding becomes an imperative that must begin in our training facilities. I am proud of the relationships that we have forged with the other services and I am enthusiastic regarding the potential to expand those relationships in the future.

I also informed the subcommittee that the Coast Guard had invested in a total redesign of our Enlisted Professional Military Education (EPME) program and expanded our Leadership and Management School (LAMS) opportunities for our mid-grade petty officers and our junior officers. Successful completion of the EPME program is now a pay grade based requirement for advancement eligibility within the enlisted workforce and LAMS expansion will continue in fiscal year 2006. LAMS expansion lacks traction within the resource proposal process but it is absolutely key to the training and professional development of our workforce. We continue to make difficult budgetary decisions within the base to incrementally improve throughput capacities but we remain far short of our goal of ultimately providing mandatory training requirements for our mid grade petty officers. Even with expansion, only 34% of our petty officers have attended LAMS. Your understanding of this matter is greatly appreciated.

In addition to improving our formal and informal training processes, we have also increased the number of our core leadership competencies to 28. Recognizing the need to evaluate our workforce based upon leadership competency metrics, we have also revised and aligned our officer and enlisted evaluation process to ensure vertical alignment and to set clear measurements of individual performance standards.

We pay very close attention to our bi-annual organizational assessment surveys and work hard to minimize any shortfalls that are identified. One such shortfall that impacts retention is dissatisfaction with the front-line supervisor. As a result, we have mandated the use of individual development plans that require the front-line supervisor to become more actively involved with the personal and professional development of their subordinates. We are also chartering a petty officer needs assessment to identify the training needs of our future junior petty officers (E-4) and to standardize training requirements for non-petty officers (E1-E3) so that they are more effective in their leadership roles as future petty officers.
The Coast Guard’s progress in developing a meaningful leadership training continuum has never been more prevalent than it is today. I am proud of our efforts and remain confident that everything that can be done is being done to better prepare our workforce for exceptional service in the future of our nation’s Coast Guard.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

RESOURCES

As a result of your authorization to increase our personnel end-strengths after September 11, 2001, I believe that we are adequately staffed to perform our multi-mission responsibilities to the best of anyone’s human ability, and we demonstrate that to the American and International public day-after-day. We have grown the workforce in the most methodical of ways possible and we have conducted a thorough review of the requisite skill sets of the Coast Guard workforce of the future. We have adjusted our force structure and related training requirements to ensure that our people have the ability to operate the equipment associated with our fleet of cutters and aircraft that are being acquired by our Integrated Deepwater Systems recapitalization initiative that is currently underway. However, there is more to the effective safeguarding of our homeland than increasing the size of a military workforce and our people are facing those difficulties every single day.

The principal difficulty for our afloat workforce today is that they are trained to serve aboard modern, well-equipped and interoperable assets but in actuality, they are serving aboard the third oldest fleet of cutters of 42 similar fleets throughout the world. I believe that our assets rank above only those of the Republic of the Philippines and Mexico, yet we remain the premier Coast Guard of the world. That fact, in and of itself is testament to the dedication and resourcefulness of our people who can conquer just about anything, but it doesn’t lessen the impact of our current fleet readiness predicament to them or our organizational mission set.

As in years past, fiscal year 2005 presented major challenges to the officers and crews assigned to our fleet of antiquated cutters. Legacy cutters operated less than 50% of the time without major equipment casualties, even though our investment per operational day has doubled during the last six years. As quantified in our abstract of operations data base, our legacy fleet sustained a total of 774 unscheduled maintenance and repair days in 2005. This is the equivalent of forfeiting over two years worth (in one year) of scheduled activities, thereby negatively impacting planned operational missions, training, and crew leave and liberty. These are all key factors that govern crew morale and performance. Our people deserve operational assets that are equipped to twenty-first century standards in order to protect our country from its current array of maritime threats. We currently do not have those assets and our fleet of cutters and aircraft are at-risk of deteriorating to the point where they will ultimately become incapable of meeting mission requirements. Our Integrated Deepwater System (IDS) recapitalization initiative remains our service’s rightful highest priority and we are appreciative of the historical support afforded by this subcommittee.




FAMILY AND UNACCOMPANIED PERSONNEL HOUSING

As I have testified before, our shore infrastructure continues to deteriorate. While this statement holds true for many of our shore capital assets, my primary focus today is on the state of our Coast Guard owned family and unaccompanied personnel housing units. Considering that our acquisition, construction and improvement (AC&I) funding is predominately consumed by IDS and Rescue 21 we are unable to adequately invest in shore infrastructure recapitalization or even make improvements to our shore capital assets. Further inattention to our family and unaccompanied housing units will ultimately lead to health and safety concerns that are unacceptable to our service members and their families.

The fiscal year 2006 Department of Homeland Security Senate Appropriations Report (109-83) required the Coast Guard to report on the status of our family housing needs. The Coast Guard’s report is in draft form as of this writing but it does include two important facts that are directly relevant to our AC&I shortfalls. The first is that the average age of our owned family housing units is 40 years. Secondly, we currently face a $211 million backlog of proposed housing maintenance and construction projects. This is clearly a situation that will continue to worsen without intervention.

Recognizing the need for action and the absence of funding to recapitalize or improve our shore assets, we applaud your support of annual basic allowance for housing (BAH) increases that have positively impacted the vast majority of our workforce. The recent adjustment of BAH II to BAH for our reservists on active duty for 30 days was also a moral and financial victory for our critical reserve forces as well. Adequate housing allowances permit our members to pursue housing that is available within the local economy and reduces the demand for owned asset occupancy. Of course, this only benefits those people who are assigned to geographical areas that can support the Coast Guard demand for housing. In areas that can not support our demand, the situation remains more problematic. In those instances, we have expanded Coast Guard leased housing opportunities and utilized inter-service support agreements with the Department of Defense (DoD) to gain access to available DoD housing units.

However, in the interest of stewardship, pursuit of privatization appears to have the best potential to alleviate our housing challenges in the areas that need it the most. Those areas include communities that simply do not have the capacity to support Coast Guard needs and are far-removed from DoD alternatives. The Coast Guard’s housing authorities will terminate on October 1, 2007, and permanent authorities are required in order for us to pursue privatization on the same scale as our DoD service counterparts. I have seen the positive results of DoD housing partnerships and remain impressed with what can be done when afforded the opportunity to do so.

HEALTHCARE

Healthcare is a significant non-monetary incentive afforded to members of the armed services. From an active duty standpoint, the military health care system is one of the most highly respected and easy to navigate healthcare programs in the world. The nearby National Naval Medical Center and Walter Reed Army Medical Facility are exceptional facilities staffed by professionals that have clearly demonstrated their commitment to providing quality healthcare for our service members and their families. However, facilities such as these are not readily accessible by the majority of the Coast Guard’s workforce due to the distant geographical locations of our members as compared to the location of military treatment facilities. In the many instances when our members and their families have to rely upon the TRICARE provider network, they are continuing to encounter difficulty securing participating providers. We believe that the primary causal factors of this difficulty are low reimbursement rates and cumbersome referral and authorization processes. In a letter written by Health East Family Care in Nags Head, North Carolina, the practice manager wrote:

“This letter is in reference to the contract we currently hold with Health Net Federal Services as a TRICARE Network Provider. Effective January 1, 2006, we will no longer be responsible for any TRICARE related services. While we value our patients that carry this coverage, we are unable to adequately assist them with their insurance due to extended wait times, confusing referral and authorization procedures, and the requisite staff time necessary to meet the requirements of this program.”

We had a similar instance in Indianapolis, Indiana. A Coast Guardsman is quoted as saying:

“My primary care physician has informed me that TRICARE reimbursement is terrible and that it takes way too much time getting things approved.”

I am certain that these challenges are similar to beneficiaries who are enrolled in other healthcare programs but to the extent possible, we must maintain reasonable parity with respects to provider reimbursement rates and processing procedures of more desirable health maintenance organizations. Even with TRICARE challenges, we are seeing an increase in the usage of TRICARE by retirees, some of which are covered by other programs. This is a good indicator that TRICARE remains an exceptional benefit, but in areas that we can enhance the benefit we should be aggressive in doing so. TRICARE has made terrific progress during the last three years and we request your continued support in ensuring that the positive trends continue.

The rapidly rising cost of healthcare is an issue of concern as well. This is not a Coast Guard-centric issue, but a national affordability issue that is impacting the budgets of many agencies throughout the country. We have recently learned of the proposal to implement the first TRICARE rate hike since the fees were set in 1995. The increase is targeted for our retirees under age 65 and their families. My understanding is that the increase in TRICARE fees is expected to dampen the rising cost of healthcare within the military, which is expected to increase by 80% during the next 18 years. We understand the fiscal predicament but recommend a thorough assessment of the overall impact to our retired community and their families. The previous service and sacrifices made of our military retirees make them worthy of only the best of our collective efforts.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

CHILDCARE

Our workforce with children continues to face significant challenges associated with securing affordable, available and accessible childcare. Unlike the DoD armed services, the Coast Guard childcare system supports less than 3% of all Coast Guard children. As I have testified before, the principal obstacle that prevents our pursuit of traditional child- care alternatives for our people is the lack of shore infrastructure in and around our assignment areas that are typically void of DoD resources. Recognizing the needs of our workforce, we chartered a childcare needs assessment to evaluate gaps within our child- care system. The assessment was completed since my last appearance before you and it indicated a need for the Coast Guard to pursue non-traditional approaches to childcare challenges.

We are seeking to provide childcare services and subsidy in concert with the General Services Association and the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Association, while continuing our cost-share utilization of DoD resources where available. We are also considering funding and personnel resource increases for our local Work-Life staffs. Additionally, the Coast Guard may offer tax deferred flexible spending accounts for military members. This initiative would ultimately require a legislative change.

Childcare is an issue that is challenging to our entire workforce, including those contemplating having children. However, our people who are impacted the most are our single and dual-military members, female active duty members, junior members in high cost areas, parents with younger children, shift workers and recently relocated members. Of those, our single female parents are the most significantly challenged, often resulting in absenteeism and restricted work hours. I view the child care issue as an obstacle that will continue to hamper the retention of women throughout the armed forces, particularly those in mid-grade officer and enlisted positions. We will continue our best efforts to minimize the impact that child care requirements have upon our people.

CONCLUSION

Mr. Chairman, the U.S. Coast Guard has a long-standing reputation of using creativity and extreme resourcefulness to overcome the many challenges presented to our workforce; some of which I have shared with you today. With your continued support and that of this important subcommittee, we will sustain our current period of critical transformation to better equip our service members to more safely and efficiently serve the needs and interest of the United States.

I am honored to have had the privilege to represent our workforce before you during the last four years, and I am grateful for the time and attention that this subcommittee continues to afford the U.S. Coast Guard. Your support and understanding have positively influenced the lives and careers of the Coast Guard’s greatest asset – our people. *

Thank you. I look forward to answering any questions that you may have.

[ETC Joe Jester ret]

Ok,

I'll admit I've seen some people drink a brew or two at an initiation, myself included before I restricted my drinking.

I'll also admit I've seen a JO indulge a little too much and when I asked his Chiefs to counsel him on his behavior, he got a little beligerent, till his XO ejected the young man. I had asked the XO to handle the situation before I had to. The XO sent the JO back to the cutter with instructions to wait till the XO returned.

I've never seen an initiatee drink an alcoholic beverage during the process.

I don't recall anyone forcing a drink in another's hand during the process. After all, I assumed the Chief's were big enough to make their own decisions concerning drinking. If anyone got out of hand, they were immediately approached.

I've heard some swearing now and then ... depending on the skit.

I do recall seeing an egg or two being tossed around, at my initiation in 1981. I don't think Stan and I [initiation committee 1984-86] wasted money on eggs ... we had skits that didn't require eggs.

When I attended that CCTI in 2000, the MCPO reminded me there was no drinking anymore at these events. I told him I guess he's not old enough to make those decisions himself. We laughed. And then he told me the story I relayed earlier ... about the scuttlebutt.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Deane,

One question, and I think someone else alluded to it before, when was he going to tell the CG Enlisted Workforce all of this?

How many will be able to tell when the MCPO-CG is actually going to testify before this sub-committee? How many news networks, other than C-SPAN and even then, they may not carry it will have quotes?

That said, how is MCPO-CG Welch communicating this to HIS/OUR People?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

Okay, that was more thanone question.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Steve...Unless you were the luck recipient of the email that I got, probably never. I said in an earlier post that I would like to see an ALCOAST or MCPOCG Notes published once or twice a year.

I received this email from the D13 CMC, who was kind enough to send it beyond his silver badge network. If it had only gone to the silver badges, I probably wouldn't have seen it either.

[BMC John Phillips III]

What does Initiation and what has the MCPOCG done have in common? Not being sarcastic either, they do have something in common....Trust. After hearing MCPOCG Welch address my class, I trust that he is doing what's best for the Enlisted force.

Me being the person I am, I would do good for someone and not have to tell them about it, I would be satisfied in knowing I did it. In the same token, I wouldn't want to tell anyone I was trying to make things better for them and then fail them. I would be happy in people realizing I did good after I was gone, not necessarily seeking their praise while I was there.

I do suppose we could be kept more well informed of these successes, but I prefer he just move on to the next task. I guess another aspect of it is we are all his junior. So....the debate continues...

BMCS Smith, thanks for sharing the good info! I guess it's out there for those that care enough to look for it.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Amen, Deane

JP3 -- You bring up an interesting point about trust, and I agree with that I should trust my fellow Chiefs to follow through with what they say.

But trust and credibility come from more than just what I learned in the CCTI. Trust and credibility is built on several factors, one of which is communication.

Think to the old saying that if a tree falls in the forrest and nobody hears it, did it make a sound?

Apply it here -- If a Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard champions the cause of the Enlisted Workforce and nobody hears about it, did they really have an impact?

We in the Coast Guard and many in the response community (Fire/EMS/Police) tend to take the position that "we are just doing our jobs". The problem with that position, that while it provides some self satisfaction, it is a detriment to to an organization. We must communicate our successes in order to get recognition of our efforts, we must be able to stand up, pound our chests and say, "see what I did."

I expect the same from our MCPO-CG, tell me, show me, prove to me!

[MSTCS Tom Gentile]

If a Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard champions the cause of the Enlisted Workforce and nobody hears about it, did they really have an impact?

Steve, I for one don't know that I have seen a picture you've taken or read an article you've written, does that bring it's impact into question? You have probably no idea of how many spill responses I have supervised or vessels I have boarded, does that bring it's impact into question?
My point is that no matter what any of us does to "toot our own horn" so our peers can see how important we are, not everyone is gonna get the message, let alone even want the message. I think that is where the trust that was mentioned earlier comes into play, I trust that your doing good things and you trust that I am. If any of us violates that trust, we all have someone we answer to for accountability purposes.

And yes, I know someone here is going to make the arguement that the MCPO-CG is accountable to every CG member and maybe particularly the Chief's Mess and I would agree with that. I only give the above paragraphs as an example of maybe sometimes we don't trust each other enough as Chiefs!

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Tom,

I think communication is the key here, probably because that's what I do.

When we talk about the success of the Coast Guard, we talk about the number of lives saved, the number of oil spill responses, the $$ figure of drugs we intercept and keep off America's streets.

Those are all good hard tangible numbers, if we never told the American Public or the Politicians that we did all that, would they trust us? Maybe in light of the Hurricane Katrina/Rita Response, Yes! In light of the way we initially responded to the Exxon-Valdez spill in 1989, Maybe not!

It is important to keep your public's (people) informed, if you do not, then the level of trust you think you have is greatly diminshed.

Think about how politicians work, like it or not, they are communicating a message to people who agree/disagree them. If they don't communicate, people wonder just what the hell they are doing, and begin to lose faith that they are doing their jobs. I know, my representatives in Congress are involved in hearings and committees, I don't need a play-by-play of their individual days, but I do want to get a synopsis of what they are working on and the results.

Take another example, corporate America -- If you invest in a company, wouldn't you want to know for yourself that the company is sound, that the people you trust with your money are making sound decisions on your behalf (wallet)? Those companys do in fact communicate to their publics (employees, customers, investors) through various means tailored to their audience (employee newsletters, corporate reports, commercials, etc.) Ask the people who trusted Enron?

The same applies here for anyone in a Gold or Silver Badge position, communication is the key. I trust that they are doing good work on my behalf, but if I don't hear any communication back on what is going on, then I as a "consituent" begin to wonder just what is really going on.

So yes, we do need to toot our own horns and tell the great things that we as Coast Guardsmen and Chiefs are doing for our people. And we should expect our MCPO-CG, CMCs and CSCs to do the same.

[BMC Ken Gouge]

Wel said.

The conclusion I draw is that since the MCPO-CG is the only "true" politician in the enlisted workforce we should be more informed.

The only difference is that you can move your money from Enron to another company whenever you feel uncomfortable, and you can vote a politician out of office. The MCPO-CG is there for four years regardless, and has no possibility of advancing OR remaining in office for a second term.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Ken,

You will make those moves or vote those politicians, based on the amount of communication you as a consumer/investor receive.

While we don't vote for the MCPO-CG or who the Flag Officers will be, we trust that people making the decision are making the best decision on our behalf with the best information available to them.

I think I have beat this subject to death here -- What's next?

[BMC Ken Gouge]

Just that fact that since there are no elections, no second terms, no chance of moving our investment elswhere, and no chance of a mandate that our most senior enlisted person keep his subordinates informed unless he/she sees fit (short break)

We will have to ensure we use the gold/silver badge network to it's fullest extent, ask the questions we want answered to the proper people and follow up to see that we get the answers and then pass them down the chain.

The only issue is new items we don't know they are working on, and don't find out about until they are law.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

Just throwing this back to the front of the line. Some interesting reading for those of you that haven't already browsed it. It kinda makes the point of the thread a whole lot clearer to me. I've heard more from the front office in the past four months, than I have in the past eight years.

[BMCM Stuart S. Slesh]

And to give credit to where it's due........
I was talking to someone who made me aware of what MCOP-CG Patton had done while in the position.......
It was brought to his attention that the Band had lost it's Force Manager, had no 9 billet, and needed more billets and advancement opportunities. He answered the call and 10 billets were created. They were given a 9 billet, four more 8 billets, three more 7 billets and 2 more 6s.

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Wow! BZ!



***I didn't realize it, but the system won't allow you to post less than 10 characters, so I'm posting this***

[YNCM Doug Squires (Ret)]

"If the MCPOCG showed up at your unit once a quarter, most of the crew would probably spend more time looking at those three stars than they would providing important ideas..."

If the MCPO-CG showed up at your unit once a quarter he'd have a heck of a time representing us in Washington.

From the time I was a young boot Chief, I can remember this discussion raging in the halls of the Chief's Mess - MCPO-CG visiting the field vs. staing in HQ to represent our interests. In today's "more connected" CG, it is easier to keep in touch with the office, and he has a lot more help (when MCPO-CG Constantine was in DC he only had a YN1 on his staff).

Upon making Chief, I went to work for a Master Chief at D5 named Nick Ferro, the “Senior Enlisted Advisor” for the Fifth District.

Working for him – I met my first MCPO-CG - Master Chief Carl Constantine. I was the driver for a visit he made to Support Center Portsmouth.

It was about that time that they changed the name from SEA to CEA.

Master Chief Carl Constantine was the MCPO-CG for Admiral Gracey.
Master Chief Al Thiele was the MCPO-CG for Admiral Yost.
Master Chief Jay Lloyd was the MCPO-CG for Admiral Kime.
Master Chief Rick Trent was the MCPO-CG for Admiral Kramek.
Master Chief Vince Patton was the MCPO-CG for Admiral Loy.
Master Chief Frank Welch was the MCPO-CG for Admiral Collins.
And Master Chief Skip Bowen is the MCPO-CG for Admiral Allen.

Each as brought something different to the table. It's a great discussion. Many of their accomplishments are things that are not readily apprent to most of us on this forum. The influence getting issues through the offices, the testomonies to Congressional Sub-comittees, the work with the other service senior enlisteds.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

Doug,
I agree... much of what the MCPO-CG does is not seen by most of the troops... The only problem with that is that they have always had a YN working for them.. Now they even have another E-9 in their office... Can't think of much reason they don't put out a short bullet type message or newsletter monthly or quarterly with a few of the items they have been working on..

On another note, seen Nick lately??

Wray... :cool:

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

First of all we should give MCPO Bowen the same pass given to Adm. Allen. They just began and the story hasn't been written yet. After all, we are discussing history.

I'll tackle the comments of MSTCS Jerald P. Motyka, He opined, "Oh, and Joe? Please consider the source. Bill Wells is a very smart man... but he is nothing but a VERY strongly held bunch of opinions looking for the next victim that doesn't agree with him to unload upon." It should be known when I write opinion, in the case of discussion boards, I let it be known that it is opinion. When I write history I use verifiable sources. The case of BMCM McManis was a tragedy and one that should not have occured. Since MCPO Trent made the whole affair a public one (in violation of CG instructions), I thought it fair that the the facts of the situation come out. This was also noted in the Navy Times.

Instead of keeping it in the mess, MCPO Trent made it very public and insulting not only to the person involved but to his family and friends. I was struck by one comment in my research. A non-rated person wrote to the effect, "if they can do this to a Master Chief, what will they do to me?" I should disclose that I have known Jon McManis since he was BM2 and is a fellow Coast Guard Vietnam veteran.

BMCS Dennis Endicott (Ret), wrote a good remark on this topic. He offered, "It's one thing criticizing an institution (the MCPOCG position). It's quite another to criticize the man." I agree. However, the office of MCPO-CG is an institution and if a person uses that office for some personal reason or vindictive reason then the focus becomes the man and not the insititution. We should also include the commandant at the time. If anyone else wants to know more, email me, or just read the article. It would make a good case study for the CPO Academy. I bet all successive MCPO-CGs have read it.

In reading the thread, there is a common tone--communication. MSTCS Tom Gentile commented, "It would be a good thing if the MCPO-CG could find an effective means to communicate some of that dialogue to the Chiefs network so it's aware of how we can contribute to the cause from the field level." Of course, this supposes that downward communication is desired and that the person doing the communication has the skills in the first place.

Desire to communicate prompted BMC Ken Gouge's remark, "Would there be a legal way of having the minutes of those meetings forwarded to the chiefs corps?" Why just the CPO corps? If there is nothing classified in the meeting minutes there is no reason they could not be posted on the Coast Guard's web site, even the intranet. It is after all, public information. Then again, I've been trying to get the minutes of the Commandant's conferences from 1967-70 for nearly seven years and this is with an official FOIA request.

On the MCPO-CG's testimony, BMCS Deane Smith posted the latest remarks. These remarks could be mailed in. In fact, they are. The committee already has a copy that was sent back to them with the answers to the questions they wanted answered. I am sure all the remarks are chopped through the congressional affairs office for word smithing and correction. That is the way the system works.

This can be seen in the lines, "We pay very close attention to our bi-annual organizational assessment surveys and work hard to minimize any shortfalls that are identified." Huh? I'm sure some non-rate with a chipping hammer would appreciate this. Then, "Mr. Chairman, the U.S. Coast Guard has a long-standing reputation of using creativity and extreme resourcefulness to overcome the many challenges presented to our workforce. . . ." In other words, doing more with less. I thought the "Spirit of Semper Paratus" was dead with Adm. Loy? He said so.

About initiations, SKCM Linda Reid praised Jay Lloyd for getting "the crap out of the CCTI." Gee whiz, I had wonderful time at mine, beer, eggs and cussin' and all. Fact is I liked them all and a good time was had by all. We could speak about Lloyd helping to bust the Chief's union, but that would be negative.

My last comment is about, YNC Paulette Gough's comment, "Right now - I have heard tales of Chief's messes throughout the Coast Guard who are sharply divided on the issue of Warrants being part of the mess." The question is why are there divisions? The problem may be the warrants have not "moved on" and want to be in both worlds.

They may be guests of the mess from time to time but they made a choice to promote themselves to another level of responsibility and authority. They may use their past knowledge for the overall good of the unit, but they should not expect to part of the mess. This distinction was made in 1896 when then Chief of the Revenue Cutter Service declared "Chief Petty Officers will no longer be considered enlisted men." (The terms Chief Petty, Warrant, Forward and Non-Commissioned Officer were used interchangably in that era).

Any further discussion about my tightly bound opinions may be directed to me personally.

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

"It is important to keep your public's (people) informed, if you do not, then the level of trust you think you have is greatly diminshed. "

It is isn't a matter of trust but information as you note.

The Coast Guard's PR campaign began in the early 1880s, but this came from the pressure of the Navy Department that was attempting to absorb the Revenue Cutters because the navy had more officers than billets. The information was targeted in two directions; to the Congress and the public.

This is when those familiar number schemes began. So many lives saved, so much property saved and so on. They also added some good sea stories of rescues of the era. It continues to the present. In the 1890s, a couple RCS officers were allowed to be the official correspondents for the New York Times (the Service's first journalists) in Alaska just so the RCS would be in the news.

[PACS Steve Carleton]

Master Chief,

I actually went back and re-read through this thread, thanks for using one of my quotes and backing it up.

[BMCM Wray Gillette (Ret)]

About initiations, SKCM Linda Reid praised Jay Lloyd for getting "the crap out of the CCTI." Gee whiz, I had wonderful time at mine, beer, eggs and cussin' and all. Fact is I liked them all and a good time was had by all. We could speak about Lloyd helping to bust the Chief's union, but that would be negative.


I find it most interesting that those that only attended a handful of initiations were the ones that fussed the loudest about them.... :mad:

Wray... :cool:

[GMCM Bill Wells (Ret)]

I find it most interesting that those that only attended a handful of initiations were the ones that fussed the loudest about them.... :mad:

Wray... :cool:

I can recall those who refused to go through an initiation call them obscene and such.