YNs and SKs at Groups rather than Field Units?

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

Most of my peers would agree that a YN or SK physically assigned to their unit would be highly beneficial. However, the argument against that desire states that those YNs and SKs are much more productive at a Group. More "bang for the buck." I've not seen that. It appears to me that Group support staff would better serve the unit at the unit.

If any of the YNCs or SKCs out there would care to debate the subject, I'm sure it would generate a great deal of discussion and maybe enlighten some of the other Chiefs, myself included, to bigger considerations.

Any takers?

[BMC Mark Spillane]

I would have to say that having a SK2 at my Small Boat Station is one of the best thing ever to happen to this place. My SK2 does all the tasks that are defined in the instruction and in the long run my XPO is not doing all those tasks. I haven't had a BM2 at my station for over 2 years now and with a bunch of BM3's running the place so to say doesn't do much for the developement of our future leaders. Now that my XPO is freed from all those duties he can get out and help me train the younger crowd and ensure the standard that we are teaching stays high and doesn't get smaller and smaller with every new wave of crews. I only have two coxn's and thier combined experience of boat driving doesn't exceed 2 years. Now these two young BM3's are training my new BM3's. Sure they can train to the standard but they don't have the experience to guide the new guys in decision making skills as well as myself and my XPO. I was the XPO here for 4 years before I fleeted up to the OIC Job last year. When I was the XPO and without a SK, I was burried in my office and it was all that I could do just to maintain my minumum hours on the two boat types. With the SK billet at the group we didn't get the one on one support like we do now. There wasn't as much ownership in the unit like there is now as well. The SPO Billets assigned to Stations are a good thing. The only thing that could make this place a little better would be to assign an additional BM1 at stations to be the Ops PO.

[ETCS David Kroll]

From my perspective as an ESD supervisor, I wish I had an SK. Back before ESD's we were part of the group, and that was when we had direct YN and SK support. We went to the ESD and PERSRU structure at about the same time. Although I do honestly think that ESD's are doing a better job at supporting the fleet then we were as a group entity. Our support makes it hard. ESU's who are there to support the ESD's and are only billeted for 1 or 2 SK's. That SK is sometimes responsible for up to 7 or 8 ESD's which is impossible. So now I have to have an ET dedicated to doing his job instead of his job as an ET. So we have to have our own SK/ET and our YN support is less than desireable. However, I will say that I am a fan of Direct Access. I love being able to see what is in my records.

So bottom line, I need an SK! here!
Dave

[BMC Kerry Wagoner]

When I read the instruction that started the Support Petty Officer position, I was very happy that finally someone had gotten smart and was providing a much needed service to stations. Once I read down a bit more into the instruction, I became sad. It stated that stations co-located with a group/sector or ISC would not be getting a SPO. Of course, my station is co-located with both. Let me tell you from experience that being co-located does not mean that the unit has good support. The sector has two SK's and around four YN's, the ISC has several of each. Only the sector has provided any support for us and granted we are a part of the sector. Given that fact we have four different platforms and 30 personnel, a SK assigned to the unit would increase everyone's productivity 100% on what we are here for, the boats and the mission. Not a day goes by that several of my petty officers spend hours trying to locate, research and purchase items, not to mention the time spent on the paperwork from completing the brown sheet in FPD to the XPO making the conversions. The XPO has to turn off his phone and lock his door just to get out on the boats and do re-certs.

Move the support to where it is needed, to operational units, ALL of them. :mad:

[BMCM Deane Smith]

Kerry,

Everything you just said applies to my (co-located) unit also. Well Said.


Deane Smith
Sta Portland, OR

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

We got us some unhappy BMs out there that feel an SK or YN would better serve their customers at the source (the unit itself). Aren't any YNC's or SKC's going to defend the status quo?

[BMCS Nick Pupo]

I'll chime in on this one.
I got an SK at the station this summer. So far its been nothing but positive. The SK2 that reported came from a 378' so he's got some good knoweldge of his rating. Upon his arrivial I gave him the SPO inst and ask him to read it. After he did that, I let him know that some of the stuff in the inst he did not need to worry about but would be given additional duties, as I see fit.
Now, I discussed the possibility of him taking over the budget portion of the 87' that ties up at the sta, with the OIC there. We agreed that after some time the SK2 would be given their budget to take care of if he shows he can manage both. As of now we have not decided which way we are going, not because of the SK2 but for a couple of reasons, i.e. end of year, MLC inspec, u/w schedule of 87'.
Based on conversations with the group F&S, its been a positive for them also. Now Im looking forward to getting the DC for our govt owned housing that Ive worked on since Ive been here.

[DCCS Keith Wilbee]

SC Pupo,
Remember me. Grand Isle Louisiana. I was a DC2 then. Good luck getting a DC for your housing area. Especially if not billeted for one. Where you at now? NE America? Im in Sitka Alaska. (3) Thirds, (2) Seconds, And a First Class for 60 Houses. 12 Buildings including a complete Air Craft Hanger for (3) H-60's, and 65 acres of land. Im losing two seconds coming FY05. So Ill only have 3 thirds and a first. Go figure.

[BMCS Nick Pupo]

Keith, I do remember you. Grand Isle seems like a lifetime ago. Im currently stationed on the extreme east end of Long Island, NY.
Anyway, getting the DC is, so far, becoming easier than I expected. But Im not going to say it happened until it really does.

[YNC Steve Schmidt]

I've been saying for years that we (the Yeoman) need to be closer to the units. I think PERSRUs are horrible places and am happy to say that I have never been stationed at one, now I'm an SPO here at my Group which is much better, because now I've got full control. If your Group/SPO YN's are doing thier job right, you shouldn't need to have one at every unit. I was on the WHITE PINE as a second class, mostly I did SK work while we were inport and I turned into a QM when we got underway. Did that unit really need a YN, not in my opinion, was it nice to have one, it was nice to have that extra body who could do ADMIN type things (could have been as SK). When I was a YN3 I didn't know enough to be independant duty, so do we put YN2s at every unit? Who's going to aprove the pay actions they do? I don't think you want to add my job to the XPOs plate. And having a YN2 at a unit who doesn't work pay seems a wast. Which means you still need the SPO somewhere, we'd have to double the YN force.

What we need is for every unit to have that extra body, the "assistant XPO", who needs to be trained in basic ADMIN/pay and SK work, like a "C" school.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

I agree with your last line. That person needs to be a YN3 or SK3. I don't know anything about the "pay approval" issue you mentioned, we just need someone to do all of the admin and supply paperwork associated with running a unit. The XPO would oversee and be otherwise available to train and conduct operations at the unit.

How better to prepare for a Group job, then to spend a couple of years at a field unit, getting to know your customer?

[YNC PATRICK B. DENNY]

I agree that every unit (including stations) should have an SK and/or a YN attached. One suggestion I put to my command in Galveston was to try and get positions attached to the stations, BUT subordinate to the Group. Basically, they'd be detached. The value is (1), The unit would get the support they need. (2) The SK/YN would have the professional support they need should problems arise. (3) Of course, the Station personnel would be able to concentrate on their mission. There's of course, a downside. There are some OINC's that would try to utilize the SK/YN as an extra boatcrew member....I say that IF they wanted to qualify, by all means, but we must not make it mandatory. Reason: For the most part, they won't have time. I don't believe that you would ever have both an SK and YN at a station, so cross-training would be essential. That will not be easy. The only answer is (1) Pray whomever youi get learns fast or has experience, or (2) create some sort of pipeline training. Don't think the latter will happen, so praying is all you can do. I have had experience doing this at a Loran station, As an SK. We had an HS as our "Admin support", so you can guess who ended up doing it. Looks to me like the YN and SK ratings will be consolidated one day, seems logical to me.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

What did your command in Galveston say to your suggestion?

[BMCS Nick Pupo]

Chief Denny, an addition of both a YN and a SK at the group in my view would be redundent. A little history, after the Kimball Report came out it explained why SPO's were needed at Stations not co-located with a group or ISC. Additionally, there is a COMDTINST that outlines the jobs that a SPO is to assume upon reporting aboard. It specifically states these positions are dayworker positions and not intended to be duty standers. Im not saying that some CO's/OIC's will not have their SPO stand duty. But that goes against policy(see another thread).
So pretty much what you have done is recommend something that was put in place 2 years ago.

[BMCS Dennis Endicott ret]

...but not implemented in a vast majority of the CG.

[BMCS Nick Pupo]

The vast majority of the CG was not the target of Project Kimball, nor was it the subject I was talking about.
I dont know the exact amount of unit's that were selected to receive a SK. I know 100% of the Group Moriches stations now have the SK.
Anybody know the number of stations selected to receive an SK billet and what the % is that now have that billet filled. My best guess would be close to 98%, why that number? This past season is the second AY that SK's have been offered a higher number of station to pick from.

[SKC Terry Trammell]

My opinion is that every operating unit should have an SK and a YN.
One reason frequently given for storing SK billets at the Group is that it provides better training and mentoring for the individual. In practice, the individual receives less training because they get compartmentalized and exposed to less of the rate. I never learned as much as I did on a 180.
Another reason frequently cited is efficiency. An SK at a Group can do more PES reports and purchase items faster because of the specialization (see previous compartmentalization comment). Granted that the SK MAY be more efficient but that leaves another petty officer (usually a PO1) keeping the books and maintaining the budgets at the unit. The CG as a whole becomes less efficient with two people doing the work of one.
As the Cg puts SK's back to where they belong, let's not forget this experiment so ten years from now someone doesn't get the bright idea to consolidate them again.

[BMC Ken Gouge]

I have been at a Station with an SPO, and was XPO at a Station co-located. What I noticed at the co-located unit was that the YN and SK's were more than happy to help if needed.

Prior to SPO's the Groups still assigned specific units to specific YN or SK. The problem was that it would change frequently, and face-to-face was rare if you were a good distance from the group. They would also assign multiple units to each person, which created more confusion.

The other problem was that the normal "workday" at a Station and a Group were so different that you couldnt always get the support when you needed it. Whether it was different lunch "hour"s, or the fact that Stations break stuff that needs fixed/replaced at all hours, it didn't work well. With the SPO billet the OIC can alter the schedule of the SPO at his/her discretion. Keep 'em when you need 'em and comp 'em later. Try doing that with "group support personnel" from your station.

Now for more pot stirring. I think they should merge the YN/SK rates! Cross train them and let them do the job required for their particular billet. If they think a QM can wake up one day and magically have the tools to be a BM, those two rates should have no problem...

Ken

[SKC Terry Trammell]

:( Ken! I guess I should have been nicer to you when I was at the Group!
My first reaction is that YN's and SK's do vastly different jobs; they just both happen to be focused on paperwork. From the outside looking in QM's and BM's appear to have had a slightly closer set of knowledge skills.

[YNC R Tullos]

I don't think you will get very many YN's defending the status qou.... We don't like it. Simple principle: The closer the support is the folks, the better it is! I've worked both PERSRU/SPO and Admin (and even dabbled in Legal a little...). I much prefer being in the field (I've done Districts, ISC, afloat, NESU, DIRAUX, MSST, now PATFOR. So, I think I have a good point of reference...)

There's an additional benefit to doing this: it would greatly increase the locales to which we could potentially be assigned! No more being primarily restricted to large metro areas...

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

I agree completely with all your posts. I wish there were SKs at the stations or ESD's. Then, back at the group, would be the main batch of SK's. If that "Field" sk needs help, he just calls back to the office. Now, I'm not saying that it is not without some logistical concerns, but they are not that bad and with some good leadership and planning they are not that bad.

[ETC Pat Kaschube]

I agree completely with all your posts. I wish there were SKs at the stations or ESD's. Then, back at the group, would be the main batch of SK's. If that "Field" sk needs help, he just calls back to the office. Now, I'm not saying that it is not without some logistical concerns, but they are not that bad and with some good leadership and planning they are not that bad.

Interesting you remembered the ESD's. I feel special. No seriously though the ESD supervisors in my AOR bat this around and I'm one of the few folks that would actually rather have an additional ET to train as a supply PO (change out once a year) with additional SK billets being at the ESU. That way I get an additonal duty ET as well.
Our ESU has one SKC (reservist on active duty) and one SK1 for ten shops plus the ESU. I think the ESU should have one Active duty Chief and one or two firsts and a few seconds/thirds. The SK's at ESU definately earn their pay. Between the accounts and property and all the other stuff that SK's are responsible for. My billet structure may a bit large I don't know I'm not an SK but the ESU needs some more SK's.

[SKC Ronald Brumble]

How much property, dollar value, and what is the annual budget. That is one of the driving things for a larger office. There are many more but those are the two that come to the top of my mind.

[YNCM Doug Squires (Ret)]

I smiled as I read through this thread.

I have been a PERSRU Chief at a Group, a PERSRU Chief at a District Office and a PERSRU Chief at an ISC. I have also been the indenpendent YN about a 180 as well as the Senior YN on a 270.

Some Chief's did it better than others. While at Group Portland, I expected the YN for that unit to spend atleast two days a month at that unit, with the crew. Doing PDR reviews, helping with the Admin, whatever.

I alway felt it would be much harder for a YN to blow off some kid at a station in Boothbay Harbor, Maine if he knew he would be sitting accross the Messdeck table from him in another two or three weeks. It also made the YN understand there was a Coast Guard out beyond the walls of the PERSRU.

Many Chiefs felt they could not afford the time away from the office. While I could understand their position, I disagreed with it, and if you worked in a PERSRU for me, you would go out and visit your units.

During my last seven years of active duty (I retired in 2003) I travelled much of the time with the MLCLANT Compliance Inspection Staff as a Compliance Inspector.

I gained a terrific appreciation for the mountains of "stuff" the OINC and XPO at a station or WPB have to know and have to do. I spent a lot of time in awe over how they juggled their day to get everything done.

Any help they get to move some of that stuff of their plates has to be good for the unit.