Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 24, 2017, 04:44:53 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: Mission Staff Assistant a defacto requirement for Tech Rating in Safety?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print
Author Topic: Mission Staff Assistant a defacto requirement for Tech Rating in Safety?  (Read 1345 times)
stillamarine
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 739
Unit: SER-AL-134

« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2017, 01:01:13 PM »

I happened to look at some SQTRs this week because of an upcoming SAREX. I always thought MSA or MRO were requirements for any other mission base billets. I apparently was wrong. You can go AOBD or GBD, PSC, OSC then IC without having MSA. Yet some smaller requirements (PIO, LO) requires it.
Logged
Tim Gardiner, 1st LT, CAP

USMC AD 1996-2001
USMCR    2001-2005  Admiral, Great State of Nebraska Navy  MS, MO, UDF
tim.gardiner@gmail.com
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,455

« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2017, 01:23:14 PM »

Has anyone else encountered this?

I can't get my Tech rating in Safety because e-services says I'm not a trainee status as a Mission Safety Officer (which is a requirement).

No, it actually isn't, at least not in terms of the actual verbiage of the Pamphlet.
Every time I saw this thread something didn't ring true and I finally had a moment to read it.

CAPP 217, Page 8
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/P217_0B9C2E042F744.pdf

"SERVICE REQUIREMENTS
1. Complete a minimum 6-month internship as a unit safety officer or assistant safety officer.
2. Conduct at a minimum six safety briefings/meetings for the unit IAW CAPR 62-1.
3. Complete a Mishap Entry with all appropriate information (this may be entered as a “test entry” if no mishap has occurred).
4. Complete at least one eServices Improvement Suggestion/Hazard Report Entry (this may be entered as a “test entry” if no identifiable hazard exists).
5. Completion of the technician level requirements must be evaluated and certified using Attachment 1, Safety Officer Technician Level Checklist, by a senior or master
rated safety officer and processed in accordance with CAPR 50-17.
6. Qualify in General Emergency Services (GES).
7. Successfully complete Initial Communications User Training (I-CUT).
8. Begin training as a Mission Safety Officer (MSO)."


Note, it does not say "Trainee Status", it says "begin training", versus the verbiage for Senior which says:

"6. Become a qualified Mission Safety Officer."

Approval of any specialty track is at the subjective authority of the respective Unit Commander, in this case in concert
with a "Senior or Master-rated" Safety Officer.

"Begin training" is as simple as "Yes, I'm working with Maj Simpson our ESO on the requirements, one of which will be MSA",
and Capt Rowe is helping me with what I need to know for the tasks".

"GES" is objective, "Icut" is objective, "begin training" isn't.

MSA is required for MSO, it's required for a Senior in Safety, it's not required for Technician.

>>>>Luis R. Ramos was actually correct all along, and I'd question if there is actually an issue clicking this off in eServices.
>>>>If I could edit my posts above I would.
« Last Edit: February 26, 2017, 01:29:01 PM by Eclipse » Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

MacGruff
Seasoned Member

Posts: 292

« Reply #22 on: February 26, 2017, 06:43:06 PM »

Eclipse - Your research is correct.

The situation in e-services is that it is required that you be listed as a TRAINEE as an MSO before it will let the PDO give you the TECHNICIAN rating in safety. Maybe that's a mistake in e-services, but that's how it is currently coded. Or, maybe the way "begin training" is being interpreted is to mean actually being in Trainee status?

If you look above, I have someone in my squadron who has the exact same situation as the opening post...

Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,455

« Reply #23 on: February 26, 2017, 07:47:41 PM »

Time for a Help Desk ticket, or a regulation change / clarification.

Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

arajca
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,096

« Reply #24 on: February 26, 2017, 11:07:07 PM »

Eclipse - Your research is correct.

The situation in e-services is that it is required that you be listed as a TRAINEE as an MSO before it will let the PDO give you the TECHNICIAN rating in safety. Maybe that's a mistake in e-services, but that's how it is currently coded. Or, maybe the way "begin training" is being interpreted is to mean actually being in Trainee status?

If you look above, I have someone in my squadron who has the exact same situation as the opening post...
Playing Devil's Advocate - If a member is not a MSO Trainee in Eservices, how does eServices know the member is in training to be an MSO?
Logged
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,414

« Reply #25 on: February 26, 2017, 11:38:34 PM »

Why should eServices need to reflect that?

Take for instance Technician ES checklist. It states that the member must be "one year qualified in any ES specialty."

Yet a PDO awards the Tech rating without any meddling from eServices checking whether that person really has that qualification. Should it? Maybe. But this is another completely different issue.

Likewise the PDO should be able to award that Tech rating without eServices checking whether that member is an MSO trainee. Should it? Maybe. But again this is another different issue that must be stated in the CAP regs. The checklist says only "should be in training." The checklist and regs do not say "should be a trainee."


« Last Edit: February 26, 2017, 11:42:34 PM by Luis R. Ramos » Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,455

« Reply #26 on: February 26, 2017, 11:45:47 PM »

Playing Devil's Advocate - If a member is not a MSO Trainee in Eservices, how does eServices know the member is in training to be an MSO?

It doesn't, and shouldn't because "MSO Trainee", per se is not a requirement.

The presumption here is that the PDO module isn't allowing the appointment, all other things being equal, but this is hard to confirm
because there is no way to test it.

If the OP is "being told that", then a clarification to the teller is in order.  If the system is locking out
the appointment, then a Help Desk ticket is in order.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,414

« Reply #27 on: February 26, 2017, 11:50:32 PM »

I sent a request to the Help Desk for clarification and checking that assumption. I will post what they say.
Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,762

« Reply #28 on: February 27, 2017, 08:58:11 AM »

Playing Devil's Advocate - If a member is not a MSO Trainee in Eservices, how does eServices know the member is in training to be an MSO?

It doesn't, and shouldn't because "MSO Trainee", per se is not a requirement.

The presumption here is that the PDO module isn't allowing the appointment, all other things being equal, but this is hard to confirm
because there is no way to test it.

If the OP is "being told that", then a clarification to the teller is in order.  If the system is locking out
the appointment, then a Help Desk ticket is in order.

But isn't it? If you are "in training", are you not a "trainee"? I grok that the language chosen is less than perfect but this seems like one of those areas that should follow the definitions of words.
Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
Luis R. Ramos
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,414

« Reply #29 on: February 27, 2017, 09:24:05 AM »

Then NHQ should change another part of that regulation to reflect such use.
Logged

Squadron Administrative Officer
Squadron Communication Officer
Squadron Emergency Services Officer
Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,010
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #30 on: March 01, 2017, 11:38:36 AM »

I happened to look at some SQTRs this week because of an upcoming SAREX. I always thought MSA or MRO were requirements for any other mission base billets. I apparently was wrong. You can go AOBD or GBD, PSC, OSC then IC without having MSA. Yet some smaller requirements (PIO, LO) requires it.


Just an FYI, this post is: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=21875.msg400000#msg400000

Congratulations, Mr 400,000th Post Author
Logged
stillamarine
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 739
Unit: SER-AL-134

« Reply #31 on: March 01, 2017, 12:20:00 PM »

I happened to look at some SQTRs this week because of an upcoming SAREX. I always thought MSA or MRO were requirements for any other mission base billets. I apparently was wrong. You can go AOBD or GBD, PSC, OSC then IC without having MSA. Yet some smaller requirements (PIO, LO) requires it.


Just an FYI, this post is: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=21875.msg400000#msg400000

Congratulations, Mr 400,000th Post Author

Where's my cookie??  >:D
Logged
Tim Gardiner, 1st LT, CAP

USMC AD 1996-2001
USMCR    2001-2005  Admiral, Great State of Nebraska Navy  MS, MO, UDF
tim.gardiner@gmail.com
Майор Хаткевич
200,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 6,010
Unit: GLR-IL-049

« Reply #32 on: March 01, 2017, 12:40:09 PM »

Ask one of the mods/admins to add it to your title. :0
Logged
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 9,835
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #33 on: March 02, 2017, 04:46:58 AM »

Ask one of the mods/admins to add it to your title. :0

Admin action. Notification sent.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
Pages: 1 [2]  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  General Discussion  |  Membership  |  Topic: Mission Staff Assistant a defacto requirement for Tech Rating in Safety?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.116 seconds with 20 queries.
click here to email me