New SET system and GTLs

[RiverAux]

With the Aug 2009 revision to 60-3, unit commanders have the ability to limit which qualifications can be evaluated by persons with the SET qual and also instituted a requirement that such persons have been qualified in that skill for at least a year before evaluating anyone in it. 

Has this been doing an effective job at keeping people from evaluating quals that they really shouldn't be evaluating?

In particular I'm interested in those that would be signing off on Ground Team Leader qualifications.  Personally, I would have a system like we have for Mission Check Pilots to evaluate GTLs (Master GTLs?).  Since GTLs are the backbone of our GSAR program, if we have weak GTLs out there it will lead to having weak GTMs pretty quickly.  So, making sure that the person signing off on a GTL really knows the skill and will make sure they don't sign off on someone that doesn't really know the job is very important.

However, I fear that letting any squadron commander say that any GTL is qualified to be a GTL SET (which would be allowed under the current system) won't really place the bar very high.  First, how many squadron commanders know GSAR well enough to judge whether a GTL really knows their business?  I think most are likely to give them the benefit of the doubt and essentially leave us with the old system. 

But, if the new system is keeping weak GTLs from being GTL SETs, then maybe what we have is ok.  What are people seeing out in the field?

[lordmonar]

I have not seen any of the thing discussed at the NB about appointing SET individuals for specific specialties implemented in my neck of the woods.

[RiverAux]

Has gone from NB into the current version of 60-3....Its certainly possible that commanders might never have been explicitely told that they have this new authority. 

[lordmonar]

I know that 60-3 got changed....but I don't see anyone making an effort to implement it.

For what it's worth....I don't really see the major need for this.

The problem is not really that the SETs guys are unqualified....it is that they are pencil whipping certifications.

Guy who would be on the approved list if the wing ever implemented it are just not holding their trainees to the published standards.

The only way to really fix the problem is to:

A) Make the list mandatory.
B) Implement a what in the USAF Comm world is called a Maintenance Standardisation Evaluation Program...where technicians are evaluated by and outside agency on a couple of random tasks (usually between 1-10% depending on the number of tasks qualified on).  If they fail then the cert is pulled and they go back to retraining.  If one trainer has a high number of failures then that guy gets and MSEP and they may pull his trainer cert.
C) Implement an ES training Quality Assurance program...that makes sure local training is meeting standards.

The new reg give the commanders the authority to do some of this...but does not mandate it.

[CommGeek]

My Wing wants to empliment it, but national dosent have any way to control it on OPS Qualls  yet.  looks like they put the cart in front of the horse...

If you limit the eveluators you can probably take care of the pencil whipping.


What do you guys use to validate tasks?  do you use a F113?


Right now its a CF becouse we have no way to verify that a particular evaluator actually signed you off, or if you just pencil whipped it.   If we used a F113 we have some way to verify from the evaluator that they did indeed sign you off.  Been thinking about making it electronic, so it goes into a SQL database....easier to search.

[tsrup]

In particular I'm interested in those that would be signing off on Ground Team Leader qualifications.  Personally, I would have a system like we have for Mission Check Pilots to evaluate GTLs (Master GTLs?).

And what makes you think a Mission Check Pilot would be the best evaluator for a Ground team leader? 

[RiverAux]

Try reading it again.  I said that I wanted a SYSTEM LIKE we have for Mission Check Pilots.

[RADIOMAN015]

My Wing wants to empliment it, but national dosent have any way to control it on OPS Qualls  yet.  looks like they put the cart in front of the horse...

If you limit the eveluators you can probably take care of the pencil whipping.

The challenge is to be sure that you have evaluators in every geographic area of your wing.  IF you start requiring GT and other mission support ground types (the flyers can normally fly to get evaluated), to drive to far a distance, I would guess that you won't have anyone available in some geographic areas.  Nothing like having a timely response

Personally, I think this pencil is just organizational paranoia that seems to run rampant in some circles in CAP now a days.  Frankly even if someone allegedly knows everything and is signed off they can have a bad day and not doing something correctly or just plain forget.   Many wings, other than having monthly exercises have virtually no missions for Ground Teams anyways.  That's the reality of this
RM