Lt Cdr to Cdr Promotion

Discussion in 'The Fleet' started by wave_dodger, Jul 3, 2006.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. wave_dodger

    wave_dodger War Hero Book Reviewer

    Anyone else looked at the Galaxy Brief that was issued last week regarding SO2 to SO1 promotion. Of real interest is the introduction of “Man-Years’ Limits†to control the average time left to serve.

    Now don't call me a cynical old bluffer but isn't that just pushing the age on promotion up to at least 40/41.

    I'm sure I've read somewhere that promotion was to requirement and based upon MERIT. This seems to say its on time served and age!
     
  2. Promotion is based upon merit AND potential, not just merit. If you are CINCFLEET material then age is irrelevant and you will be promoted as and when the system needs to in order to keep you moving and get you the right experience. If, like the rest of us mere mortals, you have a ceiling of say Commodore, then it is obvious that there is no point in being promoted to Commander too young. Working backwards from the retirement age of 55, if you serve one job as a Commodore, then you need to be promoted at 53. This means that if you are to do 2 jobs as a Captain, before being promoted, then you need to be promoted to Captain around 48/49. In order to be promoted to Captain, you need to have experienced at least 3 of the following 4 : Sea Command, a Staff Job, a MOD job and possibly a NATO job. Assuming you get promoted after the 3rd or 4th job, you need to be promoted to Commander between 40 and 42.

    I would suggest that the ages you quote are based on that logic rather than a mandatory "time served" criteria.

    But I might be wrong!
     
  3. In a recent brief I received from the promotion section of DNCM, it was revealed that irrespective of time served either in the RN or in the rank of Lt Cdr, promotion to Cdr is being aimed at 40 year olds and above. What utter typical woolly thinking guff from the intellectual pygmies and halfwits who now stuff our exalted "human resources" directorate.

    Purpleronnie is absolutely correct in his assertions about working backwards from 1*, but what if you have some bright SO2 who has achieved all of the requisite skills by 35, having joined up at 18? Should he be held over for 5 years while his equally clever graduate colleague, who joined BRNC at the same time at 23 be pushed up the system? An age based system is perverse, unfair and probably illegal and the sooner the (rather impressive) new 2SL sees this the better.

    The RN is the only organisation in the world who treats their brightest officers like this - other companies and even other services recognise that an experienced (note I'm not talking about token promotions of boy Cdrs for show) and capable young manager can easily hold their own amongst people many years older. It works in commerce, it works in the Army (I met a 37 yr old full Colonel last month) and up until recently it worked in the RN.

    No wonder everyone's leaving to work for a decent employer. I bet the monkeys who put McDonald's employees into branches don't call themselves "career manager" (who in the RN purely appoint).

    Rant over!
     
  4. Since I'm between posts at the moment and my next role is likely to keep me well away from the circulation for such things - any chance that one of you fine fellows could zap me a copy to read?
     

Share This Page