«  
  »

Coast Guard’s High-Year Tenure Progam Redux?

Posted on 1 July 2009 by Ryan Erickson | Comments

rumorsIt’s ironic I would hear about the CG’s high-year tenure (HYT) program this week. The irony is two fold; first the historical aspect of this piece would be the fact that today, in 1991, was the day that ADM Kime officially implemented the HYT program for the Coast Guard. The official line from the Coast Guard historian’s site-

A high personnel retention level led the Commandant, ADM J. William Kime, to begin implementing a high-year tenure program, otherwise known as an “up or out” policy to “improve personnel flow and opportunities for advancement.” Two significant points of the program were that they limited enlisted careers to 30 years of active service and established “professional growth points” for paygrades E-4 through E-9, which had to be attained in order to remain on active duty. Up until this time, enlisted members could remain on active duty until age 62 — the only U.S. military work force with that option.

Though I didn’t join the ranks as a Coastie/Guardian until 1999 the high-year tenure effects were still being felt. As an Airman at eCity it was still the talk of what went wrong in the aviation community, closely followed by the rate merger (though I think we’ve gotten passed that). The easiest way to describe the program is this: depending on your rank, and time in service you may be separated for discharge. Can’t make rank? You may be packing your bags.

Which bring me to my second point of irony- It’s now Wednesday and at least three people (one even did the “OMG did you hear?” thing) have brought to my attention a rumor (as in an item that may or may not be true) that a high-year tenure program is just around the corner from being announced. However, I don’t recall every hearing that the plan was deactivated. So for those of you who’ve been dragging you feet… time to pick ‘em and start running.

Anyone else hear anything about this? If so it’s time to encourage your folks to get with their ESO’s and start getting promoted.

Oh, and speaking of running- word is you may want to purchase those mandatory PT clothes soon… I’m just sayin’ ;)

Category: Policy, by Ryan Erickson | Comments
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • palco92
    i would think if you had 26 yrs in service,you would be higher than a e7.my son's recruiter was a e6 with 22 yrs in.i was floored.being prior service navy and army,this sounded wrong.but then we in the army called people like that,retired on active duty(road solder)
  • CZ
    I think you missed the point of the replies though - there never was an 'Up or Out' movement in the Coast Guard until this came along. And most of the best job assignments are for E-5s. IE independent duty, something that is rare outside the CG. How many Navy or Army units got by with only one of a particular rate or MOS? Not many I bet.

    I knew plenty of E6s who retired with 20+ years of service, they simply didn't want the extra headache being an E7 often entails - writing performance reviews for your guys, extra duties/supervision. It's all fine and dandy to quickly make rank while serving your country but don't get down on those who choose to enjoy the experience and not seek promotions, it doesn't mean they are slow or rocks, they may be very good at what they do and enjoy the level they are at.

    And yes, there are always those that are in FIGMO or ROAD mode, but they are a minority compared to those just doing their job the best they can and giving the CG it's best.
  • palco92
    cz. i think extra duties should come with the rank!i don't know what you mean by independent duty.in the army.if you were a grunt,you were a grunt.in the navy,if you were a AMS,you were a AMS.in the coast guard,if you were a AMT,you were a AMT.
  • CZ
    Independent duty - for example FS (food service specialist/cook) - On a patrol boat (87' 110' or the like) there is only one, thus he has the shop to himself. At smaller air stations there used to be only one radioman (E5/PO2). While they answer to command like everyone else they don't have a bunch of others in the same rate at their location, basically creative control if you will of their 'shop'. And yes, extra duties come with the rank, thus why some don't want to make E6 or E7, they're happy with what they have - does that mean they should be kicked out? Not in my opinion if they are still productive and getting good reviews from their command.
    And again, the CG did not have any form of high-year prior to the early 90s, so it was not uncommon either to find an E4 with 15 years. Had they started from the top down, say cut back on the # of E8/9 that were over 30 years, this might have created upward flow for those below and with it hanging over their heads they likely would have sought promotion. On the cutter I was on we had an SS (FS now, cook) who had been an E4 for 13 years, he was going to be booted, ended up #1 on the E5 service wide exam first try, he just didn't want the rank but didn't want to be booted either. Had it been a more delayed enforcement to the lower ranks and trimmed upper ranks first it might have been less traumatic but it's all hindsight now.
    Ask some of those that have been in CG aviation for a while how the double whammy of HYT and rate mergers was for them on promotions and how long it took to get some flow of 'normal' again.
  • James Owens
    I was forced to retire in '96 for HYT as an E7 with 26 yrs. I enjoyed, and prefered, duty as an Independant Duty HS and the largest number of these bilits were for E5. Additionally, and I am not knocking it, but the rate merger with Dental Tech froze the rate, for the most part, for a good solid ten years. Two or three missed oportunities, a couple blown service wide exams, and I make E7 just in time to be "retired" under High year tenure. Only a few years later they were looking (begging) for experianced people to reenlist as their experiance base was too watered out. I always excelled in my job (high evaluations, peronal awards, a score of 98 out of 100 at reftra, etc.) but was seperated, I felt, more for finding my preferd level of competency than for under achievement. Performance should be a large factor, or at least, a factor and not just time in grade. up or out programs left the service with inexperianced, "do whatever it takes to get ahead" self-absorbed, young people needing to grow into their jobs as fast as possible. The service missed the point that faster is not better and that not everyone was concerned with doing THEIR job vs. doing THE JOB. HYT is just not the best measure of who should go and who should stay. The Commandant, I guess, compared the apples of the commishend officer corps (where being passed over for rank was attributed to performance) and enlisted ranks whre, often the job was more important than personal advancement. Of course all of the Officer's I knew valued the job and always strived to do well on the job. However, some of the best of them were passed over and separated for not being exactly what a superior wanted at the time. It is all an imperfect system trying to retain those it deems as the most perfect soley based on how fast they advanced out of a job, not how well they performed at any job.
  • CZ
    The HYT tenure plan cost a lot of tribal knowledge. I was an RM2 at the time and watched some good people get booted - people who weren't slackers, they just loved the billets at their rank/rate. For example the best SS (Now FS) and DC billets were for 2nd class POs, mostly on patrol boats and tenders or small stations, but all independent duty. Most RM independent duty units (like Airstas) were for 2nds. So these guys got booted because they stayed as a second, racked up ridiculous sea time in some cases, but they loved it and did good jobs - did not hurt anything. Yeah, it weeded out a few SA/FA who never made SN/FN but how big of an impact was that for advancement? Most of these guys would have gotten out after their 4 years anyway and wouldn't have plugged any rates up.
    I think the HYT program was suspended or parts were some time in the late 90s, I vaguely remember something about it around the time I got out in '98. It didn't help me move up any, that's for sure, but I can blame Hurricane Andrew for that - Commsta Miami got hit and automated early, so all those radiomen had no where to go, put the RM1 very top heavy.

    ex RM/TC2
    '88-'98
    Semper Gumby!
blog comments powered by Disqus