Training is pivotal to the career of every U.S. Navy sailor. From the minute we step off the boat at Recruit Training Command until our last day of service, we train. While some topics are learned and then maintained through practice, others require training on a more frequent basis. As the Navy is constantly bringing in new people while others retire, training is something sailors must constantly do to maintain readiness.
Sailors can receive outstanding training, but until they get hands-on experience, that training is largely ineffective. The Navy has gotten wise to this fact and is instituting what is known as Ready Relevant Learning—a process that will train sailors in specific areas of their jobs while they are doing them, at predetermined points in their careers. This is an excellent idea, but it has one major problem: In three to five years, half of these sailors are going to throw all of that experience away. This is not because they do not care or they are separating from the service. It is because the Navy’s detailing system is broken.
Experience is one of the Navy’s greatest assets, but it often is squandered because we are unable to find the correct people for the correct job during the detailing window. The Navy can keep its experience where it counts by changing the detailing system to allow experienced sailors to stay where they are most needed. Making use of sailors’ experience will increase readiness, save money on training, reduce relocation costs, and increase the quality and state of repair of the fleet and squadrons.
Orders detailing is set up to take into consideration geographic area, enlisted classification, and policy scores. These are listed as green, yellow, or red, depending on how well a sailor fits the orders. The system is designed to match sailors with appropriate skills, no policy conflicts, and living in the correct geographic area with orders that are the best fit. Obviously, it does not make sense for the Navy to move an aviation mechanic and his or her family across the country to work on a platform that is new to them when they are one year from getting out of the service. So, when the right orders are available, sometimes the system works.
However, the right orders are not always available. In fact, out of 30 or so sailors that I have spoken to, more than half have had to change aircraft when they wanted to stay on the one they were already qualified and experienced in. These sailors just wanted to continue doing what they were already doing in the area they were already doing it, but it was not possible because orders were not available that month, or they were available but not selected for them. Ultimately, half of the sailors I spoke with were unable to use their aircraft-specific knowledge and had to start their qualifications from scratch.
The qualification process to perform maintenance on naval aircraft is not simple. Sailors must work through a series of knowledge-based tasks and hands-on evolutions to earn their qualifications. E-3s and below eventually will earn the plane captain qualification. E-4s will earn the collateral duty inspector (CDI) qualification. E-5s will earn the collateral duty quality assurance representative qualification. E-6s will earn the quality assurance representative qualification. E-7s will earn the safe-for-flight qualification.
The logical progression in the qualifications works well with junior sailors who arrive at their first squadron. They get to spend time as plane captains and CDIs as they move through the ranks. Their level of knowledge builds. As they gain more experience and advance in rank, they are ready for more responsibility and the next level of qualifications.
I earned all of these qualifications and advanced in rank from E-3 to E-6 in six years and two squadrons. By the time I was a first class petty officer and quality assurance representative, I was a subject matter expert on my aircraft. This is the way the process should work. The problem arises when E-5s, E-6s, or E-7s get new orders to a platform that differs from the one on which they earned their earlier qualifications. They have to start from scratch but still are expected to earn the qualification that is commensurate with their rank—in far less time. If these mechanics want to be competitive with their peers, they have to get those qualifications completed quickly. As a result, sailors who have been working on their aircraft for only about six months have the same qualifications as those who have been assigned to working on the same platform for six years. These are the people who determine if an aircraft is safe to fly. This happens across the Navy’s aviation squadrons.
This brings up a lot of safety concerns. In addition, having far less experienced people making maintenance decisions results in lower aircraft readiness resulting from a backlog of maintenance discrepancies. Inexperienced technicians also may replace parts that do not need replacing and spend far more man hours completing jobs. The bottom line is that keeping sailors working on the same aircraft will increase mission readiness and save time, money, and lives.
This is not a hard problem to fix, but some important people will need to get involved. Many already are. Admiral Kyle Cozad, who is in charge of Naval Education and Training Command, is always asking how the Navy can train sailors more effectively. The concept of Ready Relevant Learning is solid. Giving sailors the training they need when they need to use that knowledge is a great concept. The only thing that needs to be added to it is intermediate- and advanced-level maintenance and troubleshooting training. Rather than sending sailors to a second or third C school as they transition from aircraft to aircraft, they can return to C school between squadrons to learn advanced maintenance practices. This will result in a fleet of subject matter experts in many different areas. I suspect this concept would work just as well with surface ratings. Keep the expertise and experience where it belongs.
The detailing system is not going to be fixed overnight. The Navy already has made one change to make better options available to more sailors—negotiation windows for orders went from three months to six months. This allows sailors to see more orders that are matches. It is a step in the right direction. Next, the Navy needs to add two more categories to the detailing process: qualifications and years of experience. The detailers also need to be given more flexibility. As it stands, they must fill all needed orders in each cycle. The detailers need to be able to see more sailors who are coming up for orders as well as the orders coming up in the future. It might mean that a ship or squadron has to wait an extra month or two before it gets a replacement, but I imagine most commands would rather wait a little longer and get a fully qualified sailor with years of experience over one who is brand new.
There probably are aspects of the detailing process of which I am unaware, but I do know the ramifications of throwing away years of experience. Fixing the detailing system so that experience, the Navy’s most valuable asset, is kept where it is needed will increase mission readiness and save time, money, and, most important, lives.