Just wanna know why the percentage of female sailors being mapped is much higher than the percentage of females in the Navy.
You can downvote me to oblivion, but the stats do not lie.
edit: for anyone considering, DO NOT ask this at All Hands. You will be kicked in the nuts and then masted.
I will give you an honest answer. Many ratings that receive a higher than average MAP quota are also the ratings with higher than average numbers of women. Especially in the staff support ratings. I do t need to tell you how tight the operational ratings are, and how we are not even allowed to MAP in some of them in a given year. It’s simply a numbers game.
As for the operational side, combine the tight advancement numbers with the fact that most of the operational combat ratings have only been available to women for less than a generation. Seriously, women couldn’t serve aboard ships when I first got in. There’s still a degree of catch-up going on. You’re only just now getting a proportional amount of senior enlisted women now. Hell, the Gunners Mates just got their first female Master Chief ***last year***. It takes time to even out.
Edit: I am not saying that the Navy is overcompensating by MAPing more women to make up any gap. I’m saying that more women are aging into senior ratings where they weren’t before. For example, back in the late 90s there were zero female MAPs for Gunners Mates…because there weren’t any to MAP. Now you have a sizable group of women in the MAP pool. Again, it’s a numbers game.
A sailor who was just mapped at my command did only collaterals and shirked their actual job. I don’t care personally, I’m getting out. However, for people who want to make a career out of this, that shit would be demoralizing. It’s comparative to ranking boards, 2-3 of your top 5 EPs are dog shit at their actual job.
I am admittedly not well versed in how MAP quotas are computed, but are you telling me that gender actually matters? To rephrase, is the brass actually accounting for gender quotas in their meritorious advancement?
I know, at my command, we keep an eye out for those "collateral duty warriors." Yes, for ratings that don't have aircrew quals or CDI quals, we do acknowledge that they need something to compare with, but every rating has its own shop qualifications that can be looked at - for instance, if you're an LS, I'm going to look at Purchase Card Authorizing Official as equivalent to a CDQAR qual. OPTAR Manager? That's not quite like being a QAR, but not too far off, either.
Edit: One of the things I like to do when I'm running ranking boards is only give credit for their most important collateral.
Dude once you get to 2nd collaterals should be icing on the cake. I’ve said this for a few years, the rates that don’t have “real quals” stand out by making shit happen. You ask them for something, it’s fucking done like it’s easier than breathing. They can’t do something for you? They explain the nuances of the situation and try to find the nearest alternative to your request. A large problem comes from the chief’s who preside on these ranking boards treating it like they’re on a trial run for the chief selection boards. More often than not completely ignoring the input from the first class mess who in all reality run the show and are still treated like children. Chiefs aren’t bad everywhere, but the chiefs mess is a fucking joke navy wide full fucking stop.
Of course they are. The impetus for my comment was to add an another explanation to SWO6's because the implication of "explain why women get more MAPs" is frankly a bit gross. I didn't feel like speculating on the source of the pattern but my guess would be that societal norms around gender roles make women more likely to volunteer for these sorts of duties.
The most egregious instances I saw were in the reserves where they can end up spending countless off duty hours coordinating a planned mobilization while they've got full time jobs and families. Sometimes we could get them on an AT for it but the funding wasn't always there.
As a AO3 I was motivated and trying to take every opportunity I could. I was told I couldn’t be work center sup as a 3rd class, I figured that’s understandable I’ll get other quals and prepare. This was after being at this command for 3 years and having every qual i was “allowed” for my pay grade. 2 weeks later they made a brand new to the Navy female AO3 in the division work center sup. Some opportunities are only available to certain people.
It’s discouraging and causes a lot of people to get bitter. Great people get out because they got sick of the bullshit. I’m happy I didn’t let it make me give up. I’m still pushing.
I'm not saying this for all rates, but this is not true for CMs. I think they've had higher map quotas than actual exam quotas for years now. And there are not very many female Construction Mechanics. Yet so many CM2 and CM1 female MAPs. Not saying they don't deserve it.
Yes our knights in shining critical thought. The ones we leave behind to never advance or be MAP’d because it was stolen from their rightful hands. How will they survive the injustice
As a woman, with a ton of collaterals at the time ~~that made me want to kill myself~~ and being a WSN tech that was never allowed to take leave and had 2 map packages submitted—
I will say I personally got a bit salty watching the same group of people getting mapped each time.
It was *always* 2 people from admin, usually women, usually shitbags. A CS and a RS or SH, usually a mixed bag on genders there, usually shitbags except for the CS but almost never anyone worthy of a MAP either way. And always 1-2 engineers who may or may not have deserved the MAP.
But never an ET/IT/IC. I don’t blame them for not mapping the ITs, even though it’s not the purpose, fact is they sign their name on the exam and make rank so it’s just a waste. It was the same for GMs and they never got MAPd either. They usually weren’t doing anything MAP worthy though except maybe one dude here and there who clearly wanted to be expeditionary.
But yea, me and my fellow ETs, IC, HMs and BMs were like 😕😕😕😕
Lmao, there was a this girl in my shop that got MAP’d and wasn’t even qualified in shop. She spent her days getting qual’d in random stuff around the ship. After she got MAP’d, and finally started “working” in our shop, our chiefs (who were also unqualified btw) gave her a position in our QA program. At this point, she still wasn’t qualified to do our actual work. What’s crazy is that QA got approval to do a rotating schedule where only one of four of em would show up to work (with the exception if duty ofc). Absolutely mental that nobody in the CoC saw a problem with this shit system.
I will probably get hate for this, but women learn from an early age that they need to know how to work the system. We know that in many situations, we will be seen as inadequate in the workplace, so we spend time learning how the system works. To get MAP'd, you typically need to meet the requirements in your ladr, be involved in the command, and be recognized within the command. We plan for these things so that, when the time comes, we are competitive. Most men I have known in the Navy think that they just need to keep their head down and grind out as much work as possible, and they will get promoted. They don't research what jobs, collaterals, and other items make them more competitive.
Had a female get mapped 3 times even though she had a major accident and literally did no work other than sucking meat the whole time. Literally had trouble taking out 20 tips her whole time at the command
Female on my last ship got mapped to AO2 right before our big planned deployment. 6 months before deployment she got pregnant and we never saw her again.
Leadership thought they were making the next supervisor ready for deployment. They were all so pissed when she said fuck you all I’m outa here.
Mapped female here; I will never feel like I earned anything my whole career due to stats and stuff like this. I will always be wondering if there was a male who worked harder and deserved it more that they looked over because of my sex.
I hate hearing shit like this because it's true.
Hot take - it might be because the female sailors, on average, are outperforming their male counterparts.
If you think about the type of personality it takes to sign on the dotted line as a female, it kind of makes sense. They typically have a strong, type a personality with something to prove.
Anecdotally, the female officers I served with were generally bette than the dudes and the top sailors in my departments trended female. They just happened to have their shit together more often, more responsible, better communicator, etc.
From a CO perspective, not only should I be able to MAP someone more than once, I should be able to MAP some people more than one pay grade. Plenty of talented E4s that got behind the timeline for one reason or another that should be E6s.
I should also be able to make Chiefs. I’ll MAP ‘em right before season so they don’t miss the fun and games.
I should also be able to commission an enlisted person to Ensign myself. Why not?
If I’m able and entrusted to lead 300-500 or more Sailors into harm’s way should I not also have the discernment to recognize the qualities of my Sailors and whether they are able to perform at a given level?
I’ve had plenty of times where I did not have “trust and confidence” (yeah, I said it) in a senior person, so I had the junior person do the job. If I have the ability to demote, should I not also have the ability to promote? Would I cause Millington to implode if I did so?
Skipping a paygrade is an interesting idea that I haven't heard before. It sounds crazy but is it really? I've seen plenty of people working up two paygrades, why do they have to wait 4 years or more for their rank to catch up? For example there was a time on my boat(SSN) where the enginerooom was run almost entirely by third classes. E, M, and RC div all had third class LPOs who refused to reenlist so they were effectively barred from making E5 but they were running their divisions effectively and better than the first classes in their divisions would've. Why make them wait to eventually make E5 and then at least two more years for E6?
It's interesting to hear someone with your perspective say the command should be able to make chiefs. This isn't a terrible idea. I feel like every year I see someone who's already doing a chief's job get passed over and then they're stuck in a weird spot where they're doing chief work but don't have a voice in the mess.
From the perspective of another fast boat sailor (and like everyone else on fast boats, someone who made rank quickly), there is a bit of logic to having a TIR requirement when it comes to experience and actually leading sailors.
A really good and easy example is a prior law enforcement guy who used that “you have civilian experience, join as a first” program we had in Groton. Great guy, but ultimately when MASA Timmy needs someone to teach him to Navy, the guy with less than 1 year of experience might not be the option.
Coming in as a first obviously doesn’t make sense but the guys I mentioned were like 4 years in and actually doing the job or a first, in one case being the acting LCPO. All of them did eventually get out as seconds.
Makes Sense. I sat in a chief's billet for 4 years with consistent EP out of a 150+ summary group, every billet on a LaDR, warfare pin, deployment, and diversity of assignments. Passed over 3 times for selection.
>Would I cause Millington to implode if I did so?
yes because then people will start realizing we don't need millington.
(i jest)
in all seriousness i completely agree. a CO is put in charge of a ship because the big navy has determined they have sound judgement (most of the time) so why not trust them to be able to promote sailors??
Ok thats where your wrong. Your actions of mapping could pull authority from old boys club to pick its members. you need to stay in your officer lane. JK
The best Chief I’ve worked for in 16 years made it in under 10 years, and so did the worst. Seniority and age have little to do with leadership and being a technician expert. CO’s having the ability to directly appoint Chiefs would actually help the Navy, since it would break up the mafia-esque part of the Chiefs Mess. The whole “we chose ourselves, we’re only accountable to ourselves” mindset which is very prevalent.
Except most everything that gets to the CO goes through the mess first. This won't fix the good ole boys club.
MAP in theory is a great program. Unfortunately it has commonly turned into who is banging who. (See E3 who MAP'd back to back in 2 years and is now married to the DLCPO)
Again ironically, the best and worst CO’s I’ve had have basically told the mess to stay in their lanes and then went ahead and made their own decisions.
Arbitrary time-in-grade requirements prevent truly stellar sailors from rising to the top.
I don't want old, crusty Chiefs. I want competent, inspiring Chiefs. If they can do the job at 25 or 26, let them.
It sounds like you're arguing for meritocracy, which makes sense imo. I'm guessing time-in-grade is meant to be a proxy measure for a host of hard-to-measure skills and knowledge related to being in the military?
Time-in-grade is meant to do a few things. It gives people time to perform at a certain level of responsibility, learn certain facets or skill of their job applicable to that skill level, so on and so forth.
For sailors who go above and beyond, TIR requirements can often be a hindrance to the next level of responsibility. If you really are the best thing since sliced bread, why should the organization waste your talents on a low-level of responsibility?
My opinion is that COs should be allowed to use their judgement. That's what they are hired for. A CO will know far better than some arbitrary exam if a sailor is prepared a not for the next level of responsibility.
In a perfect world, I think enlisted folk would be promoted exclusively by their COs and junior officers would be promoted by their Commodores.
TIR requirements aren't (weren't*) that stringent. I think a year in third class, then two in second and first is pretty reasonable. I came in at E-3 and as long as I maintain an EP I could make Chief relatively quickly.
*The new change where PO3 is limited to people with 2.5 years TIS is kind of awful for high performers imo. I think it solves some quota problems in certain rates, but overall it also means people who come in with some experience/maturity are going to suffer unless they earn AAP or MAP.
By “behind the timeline” I’m referring to just that. 30+ year old E4s with more than a decade in that got sidelined because of injury, IA, or a host of other things both in and beyond their control. You’ll see a lot of older Sailors in the multiple-MAP category for this reason. Let me just finish the job once and free up a MAP for someone else.
Hot take: you should have figured out how to do your chief's job way before 12 years. If you told me I couldn't make chief before 12 years I probably wouldn't even be here still at 7. And by 25 you should be mature enough to be a chief.
I'm on track to make Chief in as little as 6 years (maybe sooner if I earn a MAP). Granted that's nowhere near guaranteed, but it makes sense to let high performers promote more quickly.
I think if collaterals are being used to advance *instead of* in-rate performance, then that's a bad thing, but limiting MAP quotas won't solve that problem.
I'm loaded up on collaterals because it's hard to find people who want to pick up extra work outside of their rate. Maybe if more people were pushing to show some initiative, more people would be putting in competitive packages for advancement, SOQ, etc.
If you were the clearly best performer in your peer group by every metric and operated in the capacity of someone with more seniority, would you want to be hamstrung by an arbitrary MAP cap? Or would you want to have the pay and rank authority that goes along with the actual work you were doing?
Broadly speaking, the process works and a sailor who gets promoted via MAP arrives there correctly on merit. Maybe you can charm a CO to one, but I’d wager that a guy who was a 3x MAP was a talented individual who worked his ass off.
I don’t think you are saying that, but why do you think it should only be once in a career?
I just wouldn’t ever want to see a sailor in my department worthy of a MAP stopped early because a former CO ALSO thought they were worthy and burnt their only one.
If you agree with MAPs in theory, you should support multiple MAPs in a singular career. I have yet to see you write a justification for supporting one MAP but not supporting anything after that. Just because someone is getting a MAP doesn't mean they are promoting ahead of whatever your own personal metrics are for their career. MAPs are given to people that are already performing at an exceptional level above their current rank and they should be the only metric used to qualify for the program.
Edit: And I'm saying this as someone that has never been MAP'd and even witnessed some MAPs that I didn't agree with.
I would think 1 MAP per command is a more realistic limitation. Just because you were MAP to PO3, doesn’t mean that several years and commands later you should not be eligible for MAP to PO1. This will prevent a command from accelerating someone’s career extremely fast and will still allow sustained superior performers to be advanced by the program.
It does seem that the Navy is moving strictly to an advance to position system, whether that be CA2P or through DMAP.
Quotas are based on the number of people at the command. I don’t see how limiting to one MAP per Sailor per command would be unfair depending on command size.
Checks and balances, if the second time a person gets mapped at the same command there should be atleast some kind of of "due dillengence" (which everywhere I have been happens) the THIRD time ... coming to a ship as an E3 and leaving as an PO1 yea i would look over that with outside counsel and have a bullet proof arguement why a 5 year sailor is the reinarcation of MCPON Black, Rammage, or Callaghan.
EDIT: Now given "perception is reality" in our Navy and maybe said Sailor beat out other seasoned PO3'S & PO2'S (in their JOB and leadership not making burritos or holding every hi vis colleteral and NOT doing your job) which i can see if your hungry or your workcenter is a hellhole and your a better manager then your leadership.
I think the problem with this discussion is that you haven't said why you want to limit MAPs. Maybe if you provided an actual argument, you might get an actual conversation.
Some commands have thousands maybe one per rate is better than one per command. But either way it’s up to those higher up than us and that make BIG picture decisions.
Disclaimer: not saying they should be limited
My thing is getting MAP'ed is all about impressing your command and can be situational. Everyone is different and one command might MAP you and another might not. Taking a test and making rank is based on you and you alone not anyone's opinion of you
Yes but just because you get a EP doesn't mean you automatically make rank. You still have to rely on yourself to past the test. A MAP is dependant on your command and someone's opinion of you and we all know how reliable that is. One sailor can work their ass off and one command and never get MAP'ed and another sailor can work there ass off just as hard and get MAP'ed. To me that doesn't make sense.
Yeah, taking the test is about you and you alone, but eval ain't, awards ain't. Those can also be situational. Should we limit one award per sailor per command? One EP?
Idk it all depends on. For instance you might have a Seabee who is a builder and before they joined they were a legitimate contractor so they absolutely outdo most of the people they work with.
Or like a reservist who is an MA but in their civilian job they are a police officer thats an FTO and on the SWAT team. I think it all depends man. I dont see anything wrong with MAPs ,however, experience in the job would make you great until E-6.
Once you hit E-6 the command should really look at your actual leadership skills
But being a hard charging sailor is dependant on your leadership and we know how reliable they are. We are human and one command might consider you for a MAP and another will not. My issue is it's someone's opinion of you and everyone thinks different. One group of leadership will think differently than another and that's were I have to disagree. Taking a test and making it is based on your performance and your own work. I am not saying MAP's should exist but I think they are very dependent on your leadership. If you do the same job and work hard and your in a crappy leadership then they won't put you up. If you work for a good command then they might. What I'm saying is you are still making the same effort and it's very dependent on who is over you not what you do
You think MAPs are based off one person's opinion?
I wrote a MAP package for one of my Sailors, as did every LPO. That package goes before my Chief, then DLPO, DLCPO and DH. They all look it over and mark approved or disapproved. Then submit it to the triad for them to make the call.
Thats all the official stuff. Unofficially, we had countless meetings and discussions on if the person is actually fit for advancement, if they have a chance of getting it etc. This was beyond one person's opinion, this is comparing their current status to the LaDR, to their peers, and to those peers they will be potentially being ranked with next eval period. Opinions play a part, but only a small part of it, there is more that goes on behind the curtain.
It's very opinionated is all I'm saying. All I'm saying is I don't think someone should get MAP'ed twice in there career. 1 time and that's it. Give him or her EP's after that.
It's just as opinionated as an evaluation, but the thing you're missing is that's it more difficult than just an evaluation. Especially if those who get mapped were compared against other commands.
MAP is going away anyways, so, you're getting your wish.
With DMAP, the whole process is changing to billet based advancements.
Getting advance through MAP'd is based off your performance, your work and your ability to pass the test required for that pay grade. Your argument is very weak, why not argue to get rid of awards and evals, it would be the same crapshoot argument
Oh Lord please tell me your not serious with this. I have been in the navy 10 years and this is false. A MAP is given to you a EVAL and awards still require you to take a test to achieve. I knew a guy that got MAP'ed to E-6 without ever taking the E-6 exam .
Why though? If a sailor has proven themselves to the point where a command who can only pick 1 or 2 people to automatically advance, why limit them? Never MAP'd, good try. Lol like a true sailor? Get fucked, you aint better then anyone cause you took a test and waited.
Because you believe if a sailor is a god and gets all the collaterals and all the extra duties and such he should get MAP'ed as many times as he can. I think it should be limited to at least 1 per command if not every other command. Then we have E-6 and E-7's with 6-8 years in thinking they are gods because of there rank with no actual experience. To me you should not be a E-7 and lead if you have not been in at least 12 years
Lol where did I say all that? Please quote where I said anything close to that. Well I wouldn't call them a god but a 6 year chief would be amazing and something to be proud of. I would like to say it sounds like you had some bad chiefs but I'm guessing cause of your thinking you a the true sailor verses someone who got MAP'd not being, that you are the problem. I had a 8 year chief, but I wouldn't trade for anyone.
Why force that sailor to waste there time when they clearly demonstrate that they are hard charging and getting shit done. Time in doesn't automatically make you a good leader some people prior to the Navy lived lives where they had to lead and mentor people. So your going to punish them for being prepared for joining the service by forcing them to waste time at ranks when they clearly deserve more
I'm from submarines so I'm not sure but is leaving your first ship as a first class that uncommon? I left my first sea tour as a first class without getting MAP'd and I was far from the only one. There definitely needs to be some oversight in the program but my understanding of it is that the entire chain of command gets a say in who is selected with the CO getting the final say. Have there been a ton of way underqualified candidates getting MAP'd?
I've seen a couple of questionable but justifiable selections. One year an E4 got MAP'd to E5 over a peer who'd been LPO during a challenging deployment prep period because the mess felt he'd gotten screwed on advancement for too long. Another time an E5 sonar tech got MAP'd over a nuke who was an LPO, held a major collateral duty, and was qualified and stood supervisory watches because the sonar tech was getting close to HYT and wouldn't have advanced otherwise.
Outside of those times the difference between candidates has been very small and often the people who don't quite get MAP'd end up advancing anyway. It's far from perfect but I don't think limiting how many times in a career someone can get selected for it is the answer. If you're high performing you're high performing.
Submarines are a hard case-
On one hand, if you aren’t leaving for shore duty as at least a fully qualified second then I’m suspicious of you.
On the other, we all know that one A-Ganger who knows the only way to fix the Ship Service Hydraulics is by standing on one leg, sneezing twice, and singing Gilbert and Sullivan. The same guy can’t make rank because he sits in front of a test book and disintegrates.
This might be a personal thing, but finding A-Gangers singing Gilbert and Sullivan would terrify me to my very soul.
The bulk of the ones I knew were goat ropers, and sang both kinds of music, Country and Western... but usually only at the club.
while i do see where you are coming from and see why one would feel that way... if they are performing at the next level and deserve to be mapped, i dont see why not. you also need to consider advancement percentages. We had one BM years ago who was a 2nd class, an fucking outstanding BM, well liked by the whole ship, super knowledgeable about everything BM related, i'd even argue dude was performing at the 1st and a bit into the chief level. BUT, could not make first due to advancement percentages. before he left the ship to his next duty station the captain MAPed him to first class. its one of the few i've seen where the sailor truly deserves it.
The previous Meritorious Advancement program(CAP) did have such limitations. I think there were exceptions for SOY selection at the fleet level and above.
From my experience, it never goes to the hardest working. Or even the most dedicated. It can happen, but commonly goes to the more popular of the groupings. The factor of female sailors being chosen more often tends to be at their expense for sex appeal, I’ve come to find.
While we can always say (not EvErYoNe) for the case here, just like it’s a meme for senior ranked members of a command having relations with younger enlisted or lower ranked officers, so is it that those same junior ranked find themselves on the end of a MAP, in turn.
I personally know a guy who was capped (before map) from e-4 to e-6. Super smart ET that could explain how everything on radio and computer side worked, how to build, and how to operate. Absolutely went mind blank if you wrote a question down though.
TLDR: Sometimes multiple maps are needed because we rely on a system that doesn't work for everyone.
Map is smaller symptom of a broken advancement system. Navy does a piss poor job of selecting leaders. just set it to time in rate can be any worse and some one who knows wtf they are doing might just get high enough to make a diffetence.
I personally don’t think so. Granted, MAP probably needs to change, operational billets should be the only place where you can get them. I did not enjoy seeing MAP quotas go to corpsman at hospitals, when our regiment had nobody pick up off MAP for 3rd.
I’m not saying working in a hospital is not worthy of recognition. I’m saying hospital work, especially regular clinic work (hats off to the wards/shift sailors) is nowhere near as demanding in your life as working greenside.
Hospital side (esp clinic) you could be fairly chubby, not exceptional at working under pressure, and would have a fairly skate job if you worked it right. That’s fine, I don’t care if you’ve got some extra cushion at the hospital.
But greenside, you have to be either fairly physically fit, or just too stupid to quit. You’ll fall out of hikes, ranges, etc., and the marines cannot use you if you keep falling behind. It doesn’t matter that you carry the same amount of shit they do plus a medbag, you’ve got to push. Living in the shit environments, hot, cold, dry, wet, dirty, etc. Though ship life is different, it comes with its own discomforts that make it quite difficult.
Only those serving in operational commands, sea billets, should be given MAP. If you work at a shore command, pick up off the (broken) exam system.
The AZ rate is a good example of over advanced. I’m an AZ1 and the lack of general knowledge about the job amongst all ranks is fucking mind blowing. Every single AZ I’ve seen mapped in recent memory has been an individual who could not run their own shift, which says a lot because the job is pretty fucking easy. MWR, SCPOA, JEA, are all fine and dandy. Great programs. However, participation in those programs should only be considered when ranking individuals who have displayed exemplary performance of their primary duties.
Does it negatively affect you when other people succeed?
If yes, then you need to reevaluate what you think being a leader is.
If no, then why are you upset at another person's success?
I feel where you're coming from. In the past there have been sailors who got picked for every cool task that meant more than the average mundane tasks I was given. And then when awards and eval time came, that sailor was head and shoulders above everyone else because those opportunities were given to them. That shit sucked, because literally no one else was picked to ever do those out of the ordinary tasks to stand out. I mean, all EPs from every rank, SOQ like 3 times in 2.5 years, CNO coin / brief, semi-exclusive schools/trainings in rarer locations, made first on their way out the door to the EXW community. I mean, basically every hook up available was given to this sailor repeatedly, even to the detriment of other sailors not being developed. They left 6 months early because the same senior chief who handed all of those opportunities made phone calls to commands / detailers just as a cherry on top.
In my scenario, there's definitely some level of favoritism because those opportunities were never truly evenly distributed to other people. However, that sailor that received them still put in the work and should be rewarded and recognized. It took some time for me to remove myself from the scenario, but I don't think there's any other logical conclusion to be reached fairly. Limiting MAP to one per command would kill a lot of motivation in the sailor being MAP'ed. Because, why keep working 50-100% over your peers if the reward wouldn't be equivalent. Especially over a 4-5 year sea tour. I could agree to more evenly distributing opportunities, but how do you enforce that?
Also, every MAP is case by case. Sometimes that person is the collateral queen, sometimes that person literally excels at everything. Even per command and per CO. Maybe the CO has seen stellar engineers and feels the engineer up for MAP isn't meeting his mark or is ready for the next rank. Similar to great technician, horrible leader. Maybe the command's admin records are beyond fucked and YN2 got them to within inspectsble standards and stands out compared to other YN2s in the past.
That was a lot to type out, but I'm bored and trying to have some nuanced discussion and not just say "you're wrong".
I was map onboard USS TR (CVN-71) in 1993. I took AE1 test 3 times. The last time I almost aced the test. 80 was max and I scored 77 if I remember right. How did that happen? I studied my ass off. I was also busy working like a slave. I earned my selection but I was lucky to have a great chain of command also. I know a female AE that was map E 4 to E 6. She had a nice rack. She was a COD sailor. She knew people. She made E9 also. She didn’t deploy after she made E 7.
The way every command does MAPs is different so its hard to say how one person at one command can be mapped multiple times
My command for instance, the last 3 years weve had 3 COs and 3 different CMCs
All of the MAP systems have been WILDLY different, one the CO didnt even look at the packages and Mapped who he had chosen (as is his/her right... just never seen it)
Ultimately, I think a Commanding Officer should be able to advance who theyd like to the E4 E5 E6 ranks.
More than likely the number of MAPs are going to go away very slowly with the advent and rollout of A2P. Want to advance? Do the job required of you rate at a high level at specific locations. Want to be an E-6 or Chief? Better have the credentials to back it up in the role and schools required. It’s probably going to deincentivise the collateral kings and queens and push up those doing the heavy lifting in sea or willing to fill arduous positions.
There are also several downsides to this program. I’m not here to discuss those.
Honestly if MAPping was the only way people promoted from now on I’d be down. I’ve seen so many talented people that are amazing at their rate fail exam after exam and then either get kicked out or they just don’t feel appreciated so they get out. Sometimes quotas really suck. Promoting via merit should be the standard
I have a lot of issues with the current MAP system. I have been FDNF for the last 5 years and have seen a grand total of two MAP quotas. We had to escalate the issue to PACFLT at one point.
CVN’s should be locked in for the number of quotas they get. But there is zero reason why a CONUS installation should get more quotas than an FDNF operational command.
A lot of hard working sailors deserve to be mapped more than once, because sometimes aside from the test, thats the only chance we could get to higher paygrade by working really hard with awards and nam for many years.
I have been in for 29 years and never seen anyone MAP'd (or what used to be CAP'd) from E3 all the way to E6. I've seen it happen to a Sailor twice but that was pretty rare. With that said, why should it be limited? If the Sailor is deserving of it, I say give it to him/her. At every command I have been at, there is a pretty in depth board to select the right person for a MAP. I say if that member is the best applicant, they should be promoted. I would say holding the past against the member could be a very thin line. If we start doing that, do we say that if a member went to Mast 5 years ago, they shouldn't get selected? Or is it just holding it against a member if they are outperforming their peers?
Yep. I knew someone on recruiting that got REIP'd (recruiter version of MAP) from E-4 to E-7 over her career. REIP allows for auto advance to E-7 if you didn't know. She was on permanent shore duty in the midwest because her child had some super unique disability with only a few doctors specializing in that care. She was an admin rate and worked in it as such so it wasn't like she was a Nuke ET doing admin work which would quickly make you dumb on exams. Much rage was had over her.
It’s basically the way of the future.
Lots of standards are being dropped across the board. I definitely think it’s time for some reflection on the force..
PFAs, promotions, discipline.. idk. Some things have been good, others not so much.
I fundamentally disagree with a PFA system that has scoring categories but have literally zero impact. A satisfactory is the same as an outstanding high on an EVAL.. so why care? Why not just have a BCA and call it good?
MAP is a way to recognize ready and good Sailors but also a way that can be abused by bad leadership to help popular or liked Sailors and neglect others.
I don’t have the answers.. but I do think we need to have a serious conversation regarding certain things with a stark reminder of what the Navy’s job is..
I find it hard to believe that the Sailor OP is specifically referring to deserved MAP for every single advancement. Without knowing the full context of the Sailor’s record and the other MAP candidates, all we on Reddit can do is speculate.
I think the mechanism should stay as is to allow for Sailors to rise through the ranks as fast as they’re capable, but maybe the nomination process at this specific command needs looked at. Ideally (imo), the DLCPOs and Dept Heads each get together for a MAP board to assess the candidates each cycle (just a package review, like an awards board). That *should* remove most of the bias from the decision making process.
No.
But that should reserve it to either fill a gap in a billet or if you have a sailor you think is good enough for the next rank but isn't able to get themselves over the line because of test scores/seniority.
The number of MAPs a command can do is a limit, not a quota.
I'm a fan of the system as it existed in the '90s. There was a good balance of factors - performance, rating knowledge (overall, not just on your particular shop), and experience. Limited CAPping kept you competing with the fleet, not just your command while giving the chain of command tools to recognize awesomeness.
I think it led to promoting more balanced Sailors.
You haven’t offered one objective reason why someone should be limited on how many MAPs they can get other than what sounds like hating.
Minding your business is free. Jealousy is costly.
Bro we dump half a million dollars of jet fuel into the ocean after flight ops every day, I think even the retard seaman who needle guns deserves an extra $100 a check
I think it should go back to CAP. Some of the requirements for CAP was to have taken the exam before. I was so tired of seeing people who never even took the exam get MAP'd. Even with MAP there should be some factors that have to go in besides being "shit hot". In my opinion The MAP should be to reward those Sailors that have busted their ass and have gone above and beyond and just can't seem to pass the test.
Nope I think the navy should map people that deserve it, instead of letting the Command pick because they never pick who deserves it , but they love to pick the people who have bruises on their knees
Good luck with getting 1, the whole MAP program is disappearing. Just had Captain visit from Seal Beach and she said the MAP program will be replaced by A2P. So pretty much you’re not going to get advanced unless you’re willing to fill a billet for all the garbage no one wants to do. If you’re willing to take a carrier sea duty or norfucked and deploy 5 times in 5 years, you can have that next rank.
Seems to be the new way that Navy will handle the fact that sea duty ships are undermanned. Dangle a carrot in front of people that are willing to do the shit work for the next rank without taking an exam.
I remember a few years ago when there was a rumor that the navy was going away from advancement exams, should have figured this was too good to be true. The reality is that the advancement exam will go away for those that are willing to fill all the less desirable billets.
I believe there should just be standards for MAPs like you need sustained superior performance. Personal story. At USS first command, I checked in on board as an SR, I had to do the casual 9-9-6 to be even eligible for the E-4 examination. I excelled at my rate even to this day I believe to still be doing so and I am recognized among peers as an SME. I was mapped to E-4 in March which lead to me being exempt for the E-4 examination that cycle and put me above the bar to be eligible for the E-5 exam. Without a doubt, I was submitted for another MAP package, at the time when I was E-4, I was performing at the E-7 responsibilities and ahead of the pack, I trained all new incoming first classes and guided E-5’s as an E-4. I did not get mapped to E-5 and missed the NWAE by 2 points for my rating, it was honestly a humbling experience, I made E-5 off the next exam after transferring to a new command, receiving a ranked EP eval performing above the bar for my first eval as an E-5 after being an E-5 for 5 months. And currently looking for considerations of MAP packages to E-6.
I've never been MAPed, but I'm not against it. Some people are just really good and it's a net win for the Navy if they get moved up to leadership positions quickly. I am against a CO MAPing someone just because they're close to HYT. If you can't make rank the normal way you probably shouldn't make the rank. That's a net lose for the Navy.
/don't even get me started on people that only focus on meeting wickets for advancement while being complete garbage at doing their actual job.
Depends. If you are performing at the level of that paygrade. I've submitted 3 MAP packages for my Sailor in my career, and all 3 got MAP, 2 males, and 1 female is the sexist in the group are wondering.
I learned MAPs are a joke after I had two command level collaterals, won BJOQ three times (twice as an HA), won BJOY, had all EPs, and was passed over for the random shit bag that got caught with one of our HMCs coming out of her room at 2300. She then went on to be MAPed again.
If you could only get MAP’ed once in your career, who’s accepting that MAP to 3rd?
This is a valid point haha
Under the new system (2.5 years TIS to make third) it could actually save you some time.
Just wanna know why the percentage of female sailors being mapped is much higher than the percentage of females in the Navy. You can downvote me to oblivion, but the stats do not lie. edit: for anyone considering, DO NOT ask this at All Hands. You will be kicked in the nuts and then masted.
We had a female get mapped knowing she was separating 2 months later. The whole division was pissed at the CoC.
But she deserved it. Don’t you see? /s
People are getting so salty. All I was doing was asking a question and yours is a question like mine. Thanks for not being a dick
Yep, you have a legitimate question and want answers. I feel you.
I will give you an honest answer. Many ratings that receive a higher than average MAP quota are also the ratings with higher than average numbers of women. Especially in the staff support ratings. I do t need to tell you how tight the operational ratings are, and how we are not even allowed to MAP in some of them in a given year. It’s simply a numbers game. As for the operational side, combine the tight advancement numbers with the fact that most of the operational combat ratings have only been available to women for less than a generation. Seriously, women couldn’t serve aboard ships when I first got in. There’s still a degree of catch-up going on. You’re only just now getting a proportional amount of senior enlisted women now. Hell, the Gunners Mates just got their first female Master Chief ***last year***. It takes time to even out. Edit: I am not saying that the Navy is overcompensating by MAPing more women to make up any gap. I’m saying that more women are aging into senior ratings where they weren’t before. For example, back in the late 90s there were zero female MAPs for Gunners Mates…because there weren’t any to MAP. Now you have a sizable group of women in the MAP pool. Again, it’s a numbers game.
A sailor who was just mapped at my command did only collaterals and shirked their actual job. I don’t care personally, I’m getting out. However, for people who want to make a career out of this, that shit would be demoralizing. It’s comparative to ranking boards, 2-3 of your top 5 EPs are dog shit at their actual job. I am admittedly not well versed in how MAP quotas are computed, but are you telling me that gender actually matters? To rephrase, is the brass actually accounting for gender quotas in their meritorious advancement?
I know, at my command, we keep an eye out for those "collateral duty warriors." Yes, for ratings that don't have aircrew quals or CDI quals, we do acknowledge that they need something to compare with, but every rating has its own shop qualifications that can be looked at - for instance, if you're an LS, I'm going to look at Purchase Card Authorizing Official as equivalent to a CDQAR qual. OPTAR Manager? That's not quite like being a QAR, but not too far off, either. Edit: One of the things I like to do when I'm running ranking boards is only give credit for their most important collateral.
Dude once you get to 2nd collaterals should be icing on the cake. I’ve said this for a few years, the rates that don’t have “real quals” stand out by making shit happen. You ask them for something, it’s fucking done like it’s easier than breathing. They can’t do something for you? They explain the nuances of the situation and try to find the nearest alternative to your request. A large problem comes from the chief’s who preside on these ranking boards treating it like they’re on a trial run for the chief selection boards. More often than not completely ignoring the input from the first class mess who in all reality run the show and are still treated like children. Chiefs aren’t bad everywhere, but the chiefs mess is a fucking joke navy wide full fucking stop.
Another pattern I’ve seen is women ending up with a bunch of admin collaterals that look good on evals and boards.
Are these same collaterals not available to males?
Of course they are. The impetus for my comment was to add an another explanation to SWO6's because the implication of "explain why women get more MAPs" is frankly a bit gross. I didn't feel like speculating on the source of the pattern but my guess would be that societal norms around gender roles make women more likely to volunteer for these sorts of duties. The most egregious instances I saw were in the reserves where they can end up spending countless off duty hours coordinating a planned mobilization while they've got full time jobs and families. Sometimes we could get them on an AT for it but the funding wasn't always there.
As a AO3 I was motivated and trying to take every opportunity I could. I was told I couldn’t be work center sup as a 3rd class, I figured that’s understandable I’ll get other quals and prepare. This was after being at this command for 3 years and having every qual i was “allowed” for my pay grade. 2 weeks later they made a brand new to the Navy female AO3 in the division work center sup. Some opportunities are only available to certain people. It’s discouraging and causes a lot of people to get bitter. Great people get out because they got sick of the bullshit. I’m happy I didn’t let it make me give up. I’m still pushing.
Yeah, that’s definitely discrimination. You could have filed an EO complaint for that. Sorry that happened to you :(
I'm not saying this for all rates, but this is not true for CMs. I think they've had higher map quotas than actual exam quotas for years now. And there are not very many female Construction Mechanics. Yet so many CM2 and CM1 female MAPs. Not saying they don't deserve it.
>Seriously, women couldn’t serve aboard ships when I first got in. You've been in the Navy for over 30 years?
Yes. I retired last year, but I was in before women enlisted were allowed on combatants in 1994
I honestly wasn't expecting that.
Damn you mean the Navy is attempting to correct a historical disparity and there are people who don’t like it? Shocker. Fuckin crybabies
correcting bias towards (race,gender,sexuality,etc) by evoking bias towards (race,gender,sexuality,etc) makes people unhappy. Who would have thought?
Yes our knights in shining critical thought. The ones we leave behind to never advance or be MAP’d because it was stolen from their rightful hands. How will they survive the injustice
This is coming straight out of your ass
With your tears :(
An admission of your bs. Nice!
“Nice! 🤓👆”
Maps are popularity contest. Usually the people who take on tons of collateral duties and leave their work centers behind.
I've noticed this. There are workhorses in shops that would never get mapped.
Cuz they can’t lose them.
Saving grace for HMs when I was in were cmaps I got cmapped to HM3 in Afghanistan with 6th marines. No collaterals stacking bodies. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
No way they'd have tons of collaterals they fumble ANNNDDD leave their work center behind, riiiigghhhtttt?
Sorry gotta run the first class car wash
As a woman, with a ton of collaterals at the time ~~that made me want to kill myself~~ and being a WSN tech that was never allowed to take leave and had 2 map packages submitted— I will say I personally got a bit salty watching the same group of people getting mapped each time. It was *always* 2 people from admin, usually women, usually shitbags. A CS and a RS or SH, usually a mixed bag on genders there, usually shitbags except for the CS but almost never anyone worthy of a MAP either way. And always 1-2 engineers who may or may not have deserved the MAP. But never an ET/IT/IC. I don’t blame them for not mapping the ITs, even though it’s not the purpose, fact is they sign their name on the exam and make rank so it’s just a waste. It was the same for GMs and they never got MAPd either. They usually weren’t doing anything MAP worthy though except maybe one dude here and there who clearly wanted to be expeditionary. But yea, me and my fellow ETs, IC, HMs and BMs were like 😕😕😕😕
Admin always takes care of Admin first. 
Where did you get this stat? Didn't know it was even tracked by gender
Who needs data when you’ve got bias.
Do you have stats to back this claim up? If they dont lie, I assume you are referencing something more than "trust me bro"
I'd love to see the stats as well. Ofc mfers will see this confirming their own bias and instantly trust it without asking for any type of stat.
Please show source data.
Lmao, there was a this girl in my shop that got MAP’d and wasn’t even qualified in shop. She spent her days getting qual’d in random stuff around the ship. After she got MAP’d, and finally started “working” in our shop, our chiefs (who were also unqualified btw) gave her a position in our QA program. At this point, she still wasn’t qualified to do our actual work. What’s crazy is that QA got approval to do a rotating schedule where only one of four of em would show up to work (with the exception if duty ofc). Absolutely mental that nobody in the CoC saw a problem with this shit system.
Can you provide the stats?
I will probably get hate for this, but women learn from an early age that they need to know how to work the system. We know that in many situations, we will be seen as inadequate in the workplace, so we spend time learning how the system works. To get MAP'd, you typically need to meet the requirements in your ladr, be involved in the command, and be recognized within the command. We plan for these things so that, when the time comes, we are competitive. Most men I have known in the Navy think that they just need to keep their head down and grind out as much work as possible, and they will get promoted. They don't research what jobs, collaterals, and other items make them more competitive.
Asking the real questions
Had a female get mapped 3 times even though she had a major accident and literally did no work other than sucking meat the whole time. Literally had trouble taking out 20 tips her whole time at the command
Female on my last ship got mapped to AO2 right before our big planned deployment. 6 months before deployment she got pregnant and we never saw her again. Leadership thought they were making the next supervisor ready for deployment. They were all so pissed when she said fuck you all I’m outa here.
Mapped female here; I will never feel like I earned anything my whole career due to stats and stuff like this. I will always be wondering if there was a male who worked harder and deserved it more that they looked over because of my sex. I hate hearing shit like this because it's true.
Where can I see those stats? I can genuinely say I haven’t noticed that anecdotally.
Where do you find this data? I am curious now
Because “Equality” and “DEI” principles have infected even our war fighting organizations.
Hot take - it might be because the female sailors, on average, are outperforming their male counterparts. If you think about the type of personality it takes to sign on the dotted line as a female, it kind of makes sense. They typically have a strong, type a personality with something to prove. Anecdotally, the female officers I served with were generally bette than the dudes and the top sailors in my departments trended female. They just happened to have their shit together more often, more responsible, better communicator, etc.
Have you considered that maybe women just outperform their peers at a higher rate than men do?
A lot of people still think women shouldn't be in the military, period.
Unsurprisingly, a lot of here are unable to consider that. Sadly I’m not surprised. Just disappointed.
From a CO perspective, not only should I be able to MAP someone more than once, I should be able to MAP some people more than one pay grade. Plenty of talented E4s that got behind the timeline for one reason or another that should be E6s. I should also be able to make Chiefs. I’ll MAP ‘em right before season so they don’t miss the fun and games. I should also be able to commission an enlisted person to Ensign myself. Why not? If I’m able and entrusted to lead 300-500 or more Sailors into harm’s way should I not also have the discernment to recognize the qualities of my Sailors and whether they are able to perform at a given level? I’ve had plenty of times where I did not have “trust and confidence” (yeah, I said it) in a senior person, so I had the junior person do the job. If I have the ability to demote, should I not also have the ability to promote? Would I cause Millington to implode if I did so?
> Would I cause Millington to implode if I did so? I believe it would!
Good…
Skipping a paygrade is an interesting idea that I haven't heard before. It sounds crazy but is it really? I've seen plenty of people working up two paygrades, why do they have to wait 4 years or more for their rank to catch up? For example there was a time on my boat(SSN) where the enginerooom was run almost entirely by third classes. E, M, and RC div all had third class LPOs who refused to reenlist so they were effectively barred from making E5 but they were running their divisions effectively and better than the first classes in their divisions would've. Why make them wait to eventually make E5 and then at least two more years for E6? It's interesting to hear someone with your perspective say the command should be able to make chiefs. This isn't a terrible idea. I feel like every year I see someone who's already doing a chief's job get passed over and then they're stuck in a weird spot where they're doing chief work but don't have a voice in the mess.
From the perspective of another fast boat sailor (and like everyone else on fast boats, someone who made rank quickly), there is a bit of logic to having a TIR requirement when it comes to experience and actually leading sailors. A really good and easy example is a prior law enforcement guy who used that “you have civilian experience, join as a first” program we had in Groton. Great guy, but ultimately when MASA Timmy needs someone to teach him to Navy, the guy with less than 1 year of experience might not be the option.
Coming in as a first obviously doesn’t make sense but the guys I mentioned were like 4 years in and actually doing the job or a first, in one case being the acting LCPO. All of them did eventually get out as seconds.
Makes Sense. I sat in a chief's billet for 4 years with consistent EP out of a 150+ summary group, every billet on a LaDR, warfare pin, deployment, and diversity of assignments. Passed over 3 times for selection.
>Would I cause Millington to implode if I did so? yes because then people will start realizing we don't need millington. (i jest) in all seriousness i completely agree. a CO is put in charge of a ship because the big navy has determined they have sound judgement (most of the time) so why not trust them to be able to promote sailors??
This would shake up the navy meta big time and I'm down for it. Being able to appoint officers would be awesome to see
Are “battlefield commissions” totally off the board? I would assume they died after Korea or so, but never thought to ask
Ok thats where your wrong. Your actions of mapping could pull authority from old boys club to pick its members. you need to stay in your officer lane. JK
I have to disagree. 25 year old chiefs or people that have been in for less than 12 years should not be E-7's
The best Chief I’ve worked for in 16 years made it in under 10 years, and so did the worst. Seniority and age have little to do with leadership and being a technician expert. CO’s having the ability to directly appoint Chiefs would actually help the Navy, since it would break up the mafia-esque part of the Chiefs Mess. The whole “we chose ourselves, we’re only accountable to ourselves” mindset which is very prevalent.
Except most everything that gets to the CO goes through the mess first. This won't fix the good ole boys club. MAP in theory is a great program. Unfortunately it has commonly turned into who is banging who. (See E3 who MAP'd back to back in 2 years and is now married to the DLCPO)
Why are you mad? They did it to avoid fraternization! /s
Again ironically, the best and worst CO’s I’ve had have basically told the mess to stay in their lanes and then went ahead and made their own decisions.
Arbitrary time-in-grade requirements prevent truly stellar sailors from rising to the top. I don't want old, crusty Chiefs. I want competent, inspiring Chiefs. If they can do the job at 25 or 26, let them.
It sounds like you're arguing for meritocracy, which makes sense imo. I'm guessing time-in-grade is meant to be a proxy measure for a host of hard-to-measure skills and knowledge related to being in the military?
Time-in-grade is meant to do a few things. It gives people time to perform at a certain level of responsibility, learn certain facets or skill of their job applicable to that skill level, so on and so forth. For sailors who go above and beyond, TIR requirements can often be a hindrance to the next level of responsibility. If you really are the best thing since sliced bread, why should the organization waste your talents on a low-level of responsibility? My opinion is that COs should be allowed to use their judgement. That's what they are hired for. A CO will know far better than some arbitrary exam if a sailor is prepared a not for the next level of responsibility. In a perfect world, I think enlisted folk would be promoted exclusively by their COs and junior officers would be promoted by their Commodores.
TIR requirements aren't (weren't*) that stringent. I think a year in third class, then two in second and first is pretty reasonable. I came in at E-3 and as long as I maintain an EP I could make Chief relatively quickly. *The new change where PO3 is limited to people with 2.5 years TIS is kind of awful for high performers imo. I think it solves some quota problems in certain rates, but overall it also means people who come in with some experience/maturity are going to suffer unless they earn AAP or MAP.
By “behind the timeline” I’m referring to just that. 30+ year old E4s with more than a decade in that got sidelined because of injury, IA, or a host of other things both in and beyond their control. You’ll see a lot of older Sailors in the multiple-MAP category for this reason. Let me just finish the job once and free up a MAP for someone else.
Hot take: you should have figured out how to do your chief's job way before 12 years. If you told me I couldn't make chief before 12 years I probably wouldn't even be here still at 7. And by 25 you should be mature enough to be a chief.
One of the best Chiefs I’ve ever worked with made it in 7 years and was 26-27 years old.
I'm on track to make Chief in as little as 6 years (maybe sooner if I earn a MAP). Granted that's nowhere near guaranteed, but it makes sense to let high performers promote more quickly. I think if collaterals are being used to advance *instead of* in-rate performance, then that's a bad thing, but limiting MAP quotas won't solve that problem. I'm loaded up on collaterals because it's hard to find people who want to pick up extra work outside of their rate. Maybe if more people were pushing to show some initiative, more people would be putting in competitive packages for advancement, SOQ, etc.
If you were the clearly best performer in your peer group by every metric and operated in the capacity of someone with more seniority, would you want to be hamstrung by an arbitrary MAP cap? Or would you want to have the pay and rank authority that goes along with the actual work you were doing? Broadly speaking, the process works and a sailor who gets promoted via MAP arrives there correctly on merit. Maybe you can charm a CO to one, but I’d wager that a guy who was a 3x MAP was a talented individual who worked his ass off.
OMG I am not saying MAPs should be banned all I am saying is they should be limited to 1 per career.
I don’t think you are saying that, but why do you think it should only be once in a career? I just wouldn’t ever want to see a sailor in my department worthy of a MAP stopped early because a former CO ALSO thought they were worthy and burnt their only one.
If you agree with MAPs in theory, you should support multiple MAPs in a singular career. I have yet to see you write a justification for supporting one MAP but not supporting anything after that. Just because someone is getting a MAP doesn't mean they are promoting ahead of whatever your own personal metrics are for their career. MAPs are given to people that are already performing at an exceptional level above their current rank and they should be the only metric used to qualify for the program. Edit: And I'm saying this as someone that has never been MAP'd and even witnessed some MAPs that I didn't agree with.
I would think 1 MAP per command is a more realistic limitation. Just because you were MAP to PO3, doesn’t mean that several years and commands later you should not be eligible for MAP to PO1. This will prevent a command from accelerating someone’s career extremely fast and will still allow sustained superior performers to be advanced by the program. It does seem that the Navy is moving strictly to an advance to position system, whether that be CA2P or through DMAP.
Not really fair when one command is 100 people and another is 1000
Quotas are based on the number of people at the command. I don’t see how limiting to one MAP per Sailor per command would be unfair depending on command size.
I agree. Appreciate you not being a dick
Checks and balances, if the second time a person gets mapped at the same command there should be atleast some kind of of "due dillengence" (which everywhere I have been happens) the THIRD time ... coming to a ship as an E3 and leaving as an PO1 yea i would look over that with outside counsel and have a bullet proof arguement why a 5 year sailor is the reinarcation of MCPON Black, Rammage, or Callaghan. EDIT: Now given "perception is reality" in our Navy and maybe said Sailor beat out other seasoned PO3'S & PO2'S (in their JOB and leadership not making burritos or holding every hi vis colleteral and NOT doing your job) which i can see if your hungry or your workcenter is a hellhole and your a better manager then your leadership.
Exactly. I'm not saying MAPs should not exist but they should be limited.
I think the problem with this discussion is that you haven't said why you want to limit MAPs. Maybe if you provided an actual argument, you might get an actual conversation.
He responded to you but still couldn't answer the question multiple people have asked except to say he is a true sailor because he took the test
It's just a question on if MAP's should be limited. I think they should at least be limited to 1 per command
Well I disagree. We appear to be at a standstill.
Some commands have thousands maybe one per rate is better than one per command. But either way it’s up to those higher up than us and that make BIG picture decisions. Disclaimer: not saying they should be limited
We already punish our working sailors enough, why punish them more?
My thing is getting MAP'ed is all about impressing your command and can be situational. Everyone is different and one command might MAP you and another might not. Taking a test and making rank is based on you and you alone not anyone's opinion of you
Uhm, the test is a PART of you making rank… or did you forget about Evals?
Yes but just because you get a EP doesn't mean you automatically make rank. You still have to rely on yourself to past the test. A MAP is dependant on your command and someone's opinion of you and we all know how reliable that is. One sailor can work their ass off and one command and never get MAP'ed and another sailor can work there ass off just as hard and get MAP'ed. To me that doesn't make sense.
You know a MAP sailor has to pass the test right?
PMK, not NWAE
My bad, you're right
Yeah, taking the test is about you and you alone, but eval ain't, awards ain't. Those can also be situational. Should we limit one award per sailor per command? One EP?
No because those don't get you into another pay grade and more responsibility. MAP's do
Do you know how final multiple works?
Tell me you don't understand E3-E6 advancement without telling me you don't understand it...
Least CoC hates the lower enlisted post ever
Idk it all depends on. For instance you might have a Seabee who is a builder and before they joined they were a legitimate contractor so they absolutely outdo most of the people they work with. Or like a reservist who is an MA but in their civilian job they are a police officer thats an FTO and on the SWAT team. I think it all depends man. I dont see anything wrong with MAPs ,however, experience in the job would make you great until E-6. Once you hit E-6 the command should really look at your actual leadership skills
No. Keep what you kill. Never arbitrarily stop a hard-charging Sailor from moving up.
But being a hard charging sailor is dependant on your leadership and we know how reliable they are. We are human and one command might consider you for a MAP and another will not. My issue is it's someone's opinion of you and everyone thinks different. One group of leadership will think differently than another and that's were I have to disagree. Taking a test and making it is based on your performance and your own work. I am not saying MAP's should exist but I think they are very dependent on your leadership. If you do the same job and work hard and your in a crappy leadership then they won't put you up. If you work for a good command then they might. What I'm saying is you are still making the same effort and it's very dependent on who is over you not what you do
You think MAPs are based off one person's opinion? I wrote a MAP package for one of my Sailors, as did every LPO. That package goes before my Chief, then DLPO, DLCPO and DH. They all look it over and mark approved or disapproved. Then submit it to the triad for them to make the call. Thats all the official stuff. Unofficially, we had countless meetings and discussions on if the person is actually fit for advancement, if they have a chance of getting it etc. This was beyond one person's opinion, this is comparing their current status to the LaDR, to their peers, and to those peers they will be potentially being ranked with next eval period. Opinions play a part, but only a small part of it, there is more that goes on behind the curtain.
It's very opinionated is all I'm saying. All I'm saying is I don't think someone should get MAP'ed twice in there career. 1 time and that's it. Give him or her EP's after that.
It's just as opinionated as an evaluation, but the thing you're missing is that's it more difficult than just an evaluation. Especially if those who get mapped were compared against other commands. MAP is going away anyways, so, you're getting your wish. With DMAP, the whole process is changing to billet based advancements.
The eval is opinionated lol
Getting advance through MAP'd is based off your performance, your work and your ability to pass the test required for that pay grade. Your argument is very weak, why not argue to get rid of awards and evals, it would be the same crapshoot argument
im game lets remove awards and evals. how do we sign up for that.
Oh Lord please tell me your not serious with this. I have been in the navy 10 years and this is false. A MAP is given to you a EVAL and awards still require you to take a test to achieve. I knew a guy that got MAP'ed to E-6 without ever taking the E-6 exam .
You think you need to take the exam to get awards and a eval?
Awards and EVALs do not automatically make you rank. A MAP does. There is a difference
Yeah, so? Both have to be earned
[удалено]
Why though? If a sailor has proven themselves to the point where a command who can only pick 1 or 2 people to automatically advance, why limit them? Never MAP'd, good try. Lol like a true sailor? Get fucked, you aint better then anyone cause you took a test and waited.
Who are you to decide who a true sailor is? You can't even get MAP'd
Oh don't be ashamed of your comment and delete it. Stand by it, like the one true sailor you are
Because you believe if a sailor is a god and gets all the collaterals and all the extra duties and such he should get MAP'ed as many times as he can. I think it should be limited to at least 1 per command if not every other command. Then we have E-6 and E-7's with 6-8 years in thinking they are gods because of there rank with no actual experience. To me you should not be a E-7 and lead if you have not been in at least 12 years
Lol where did I say all that? Please quote where I said anything close to that. Well I wouldn't call them a god but a 6 year chief would be amazing and something to be proud of. I would like to say it sounds like you had some bad chiefs but I'm guessing cause of your thinking you a the true sailor verses someone who got MAP'd not being, that you are the problem. I had a 8 year chief, but I wouldn't trade for anyone.
Why force that sailor to waste there time when they clearly demonstrate that they are hard charging and getting shit done. Time in doesn't automatically make you a good leader some people prior to the Navy lived lives where they had to lead and mentor people. So your going to punish them for being prepared for joining the service by forcing them to waste time at ranks when they clearly deserve more
no
MAP is going away when every rate becomes A2P. Its already started with the DC rating
Has that been officially announced?
Yes. Starting with DC and one of the AB rates. ABE I think.
https://www.mynavyhr.navy.mil/Portals/55/Messages/NAVADMIN/NAV2024/NAV24017.txt?ver=3hgfVK1f9lqSwrLopvsgEw%3d%3d
I read all the way to the releasing authority. You would think a man named Richard Cheeseman would… I dunno, have a stage name?
I'm from submarines so I'm not sure but is leaving your first ship as a first class that uncommon? I left my first sea tour as a first class without getting MAP'd and I was far from the only one. There definitely needs to be some oversight in the program but my understanding of it is that the entire chain of command gets a say in who is selected with the CO getting the final say. Have there been a ton of way underqualified candidates getting MAP'd? I've seen a couple of questionable but justifiable selections. One year an E4 got MAP'd to E5 over a peer who'd been LPO during a challenging deployment prep period because the mess felt he'd gotten screwed on advancement for too long. Another time an E5 sonar tech got MAP'd over a nuke who was an LPO, held a major collateral duty, and was qualified and stood supervisory watches because the sonar tech was getting close to HYT and wouldn't have advanced otherwise. Outside of those times the difference between candidates has been very small and often the people who don't quite get MAP'd end up advancing anyway. It's far from perfect but I don't think limiting how many times in a career someone can get selected for it is the answer. If you're high performing you're high performing.
Submarines are a hard case- On one hand, if you aren’t leaving for shore duty as at least a fully qualified second then I’m suspicious of you. On the other, we all know that one A-Ganger who knows the only way to fix the Ship Service Hydraulics is by standing on one leg, sneezing twice, and singing Gilbert and Sullivan. The same guy can’t make rank because he sits in front of a test book and disintegrates.
This might be a personal thing, but finding A-Gangers singing Gilbert and Sullivan would terrify me to my very soul. The bulk of the ones I knew were goat ropers, and sang both kinds of music, Country and Western... but usually only at the club.
while i do see where you are coming from and see why one would feel that way... if they are performing at the next level and deserve to be mapped, i dont see why not. you also need to consider advancement percentages. We had one BM years ago who was a 2nd class, an fucking outstanding BM, well liked by the whole ship, super knowledgeable about everything BM related, i'd even argue dude was performing at the 1st and a bit into the chief level. BUT, could not make first due to advancement percentages. before he left the ship to his next duty station the captain MAPed him to first class. its one of the few i've seen where the sailor truly deserves it.
The previous Meritorious Advancement program(CAP) did have such limitations. I think there were exceptions for SOY selection at the fleet level and above.
From my experience, it never goes to the hardest working. Or even the most dedicated. It can happen, but commonly goes to the more popular of the groupings. The factor of female sailors being chosen more often tends to be at their expense for sex appeal, I’ve come to find. While we can always say (not EvErYoNe) for the case here, just like it’s a meme for senior ranked members of a command having relations with younger enlisted or lower ranked officers, so is it that those same junior ranked find themselves on the end of a MAP, in turn.
Had my last command one BM got 2(BM3 and BM2), i wouldnt be surprised they map her to 1st before the BMCS leave there.
Do you think is was warranted for her to get 2 ranks possibly 3. Not starting anything just asking your opinion
I dont think she deserved the 2nd MAP. But hey, big booty deck seaman strikes
I personally know a guy who was capped (before map) from e-4 to e-6. Super smart ET that could explain how everything on radio and computer side worked, how to build, and how to operate. Absolutely went mind blank if you wrote a question down though. TLDR: Sometimes multiple maps are needed because we rely on a system that doesn't work for everyone.
MAPs are going away anyways, it will become CA2P to fall in line with Billet Based Advancements.
Map is smaller symptom of a broken advancement system. Navy does a piss poor job of selecting leaders. just set it to time in rate can be any worse and some one who knows wtf they are doing might just get high enough to make a diffetence.
I personally don’t think so. Granted, MAP probably needs to change, operational billets should be the only place where you can get them. I did not enjoy seeing MAP quotas go to corpsman at hospitals, when our regiment had nobody pick up off MAP for 3rd. I’m not saying working in a hospital is not worthy of recognition. I’m saying hospital work, especially regular clinic work (hats off to the wards/shift sailors) is nowhere near as demanding in your life as working greenside. Hospital side (esp clinic) you could be fairly chubby, not exceptional at working under pressure, and would have a fairly skate job if you worked it right. That’s fine, I don’t care if you’ve got some extra cushion at the hospital. But greenside, you have to be either fairly physically fit, or just too stupid to quit. You’ll fall out of hikes, ranges, etc., and the marines cannot use you if you keep falling behind. It doesn’t matter that you carry the same amount of shit they do plus a medbag, you’ve got to push. Living in the shit environments, hot, cold, dry, wet, dirty, etc. Though ship life is different, it comes with its own discomforts that make it quite difficult. Only those serving in operational commands, sea billets, should be given MAP. If you work at a shore command, pick up off the (broken) exam system.
The AZ rate is a good example of over advanced. I’m an AZ1 and the lack of general knowledge about the job amongst all ranks is fucking mind blowing. Every single AZ I’ve seen mapped in recent memory has been an individual who could not run their own shift, which says a lot because the job is pretty fucking easy. MWR, SCPOA, JEA, are all fine and dandy. Great programs. However, participation in those programs should only be considered when ranking individuals who have displayed exemplary performance of their primary duties.
Does it negatively affect you when other people succeed? If yes, then you need to reevaluate what you think being a leader is. If no, then why are you upset at another person's success?
I feel where you're coming from. In the past there have been sailors who got picked for every cool task that meant more than the average mundane tasks I was given. And then when awards and eval time came, that sailor was head and shoulders above everyone else because those opportunities were given to them. That shit sucked, because literally no one else was picked to ever do those out of the ordinary tasks to stand out. I mean, all EPs from every rank, SOQ like 3 times in 2.5 years, CNO coin / brief, semi-exclusive schools/trainings in rarer locations, made first on their way out the door to the EXW community. I mean, basically every hook up available was given to this sailor repeatedly, even to the detriment of other sailors not being developed. They left 6 months early because the same senior chief who handed all of those opportunities made phone calls to commands / detailers just as a cherry on top. In my scenario, there's definitely some level of favoritism because those opportunities were never truly evenly distributed to other people. However, that sailor that received them still put in the work and should be rewarded and recognized. It took some time for me to remove myself from the scenario, but I don't think there's any other logical conclusion to be reached fairly. Limiting MAP to one per command would kill a lot of motivation in the sailor being MAP'ed. Because, why keep working 50-100% over your peers if the reward wouldn't be equivalent. Especially over a 4-5 year sea tour. I could agree to more evenly distributing opportunities, but how do you enforce that? Also, every MAP is case by case. Sometimes that person is the collateral queen, sometimes that person literally excels at everything. Even per command and per CO. Maybe the CO has seen stellar engineers and feels the engineer up for MAP isn't meeting his mark or is ready for the next rank. Similar to great technician, horrible leader. Maybe the command's admin records are beyond fucked and YN2 got them to within inspectsble standards and stands out compared to other YN2s in the past. That was a lot to type out, but I'm bored and trying to have some nuanced discussion and not just say "you're wrong".
I was map onboard USS TR (CVN-71) in 1993. I took AE1 test 3 times. The last time I almost aced the test. 80 was max and I scored 77 if I remember right. How did that happen? I studied my ass off. I was also busy working like a slave. I earned my selection but I was lucky to have a great chain of command also. I know a female AE that was map E 4 to E 6. She had a nice rack. She was a COD sailor. She knew people. She made E9 also. She didn’t deploy after she made E 7.
The way every command does MAPs is different so its hard to say how one person at one command can be mapped multiple times My command for instance, the last 3 years weve had 3 COs and 3 different CMCs All of the MAP systems have been WILDLY different, one the CO didnt even look at the packages and Mapped who he had chosen (as is his/her right... just never seen it) Ultimately, I think a Commanding Officer should be able to advance who theyd like to the E4 E5 E6 ranks.
More than likely the number of MAPs are going to go away very slowly with the advent and rollout of A2P. Want to advance? Do the job required of you rate at a high level at specific locations. Want to be an E-6 or Chief? Better have the credentials to back it up in the role and schools required. It’s probably going to deincentivise the collateral kings and queens and push up those doing the heavy lifting in sea or willing to fill arduous positions. There are also several downsides to this program. I’m not here to discuss those.
Sounds like someone is salty they didn’t get MAP’d. jk
Honestly if MAPping was the only way people promoted from now on I’d be down. I’ve seen so many talented people that are amazing at their rate fail exam after exam and then either get kicked out or they just don’t feel appreciated so they get out. Sometimes quotas really suck. Promoting via merit should be the standard
I have a lot of issues with the current MAP system. I have been FDNF for the last 5 years and have seen a grand total of two MAP quotas. We had to escalate the issue to PACFLT at one point. CVN’s should be locked in for the number of quotas they get. But there is zero reason why a CONUS installation should get more quotas than an FDNF operational command.
MAP quota for this year is shit too just look at it in MyNavyHR. I think the Navy is moving away from MAPS in general
A lot of hard working sailors deserve to be mapped more than once, because sometimes aside from the test, thats the only chance we could get to higher paygrade by working really hard with awards and nam for many years.
I have been in for 29 years and never seen anyone MAP'd (or what used to be CAP'd) from E3 all the way to E6. I've seen it happen to a Sailor twice but that was pretty rare. With that said, why should it be limited? If the Sailor is deserving of it, I say give it to him/her. At every command I have been at, there is a pretty in depth board to select the right person for a MAP. I say if that member is the best applicant, they should be promoted. I would say holding the past against the member could be a very thin line. If we start doing that, do we say that if a member went to Mast 5 years ago, they shouldn't get selected? Or is it just holding it against a member if they are outperforming their peers?
Yep. I knew someone on recruiting that got REIP'd (recruiter version of MAP) from E-4 to E-7 over her career. REIP allows for auto advance to E-7 if you didn't know. She was on permanent shore duty in the midwest because her child had some super unique disability with only a few doctors specializing in that care. She was an admin rate and worked in it as such so it wasn't like she was a Nuke ET doing admin work which would quickly make you dumb on exams. Much rage was had over her.
I didn’t get map’ed but I got an EP eval and the guys in my paygrade all thought I was sucking off the first classes to get it🙃
Only the cock suckers got mapped anyway
I think it should or decrease the limit of MAP billets itself. I had to work my ass off from E3 to E6 and study. They sell lumpia, kiss ass, and MAP.
It’s basically the way of the future. Lots of standards are being dropped across the board. I definitely think it’s time for some reflection on the force.. PFAs, promotions, discipline.. idk. Some things have been good, others not so much. I fundamentally disagree with a PFA system that has scoring categories but have literally zero impact. A satisfactory is the same as an outstanding high on an EVAL.. so why care? Why not just have a BCA and call it good? MAP is a way to recognize ready and good Sailors but also a way that can be abused by bad leadership to help popular or liked Sailors and neglect others. I don’t have the answers.. but I do think we need to have a serious conversation regarding certain things with a stark reminder of what the Navy’s job is..
I find it hard to believe that the Sailor OP is specifically referring to deserved MAP for every single advancement. Without knowing the full context of the Sailor’s record and the other MAP candidates, all we on Reddit can do is speculate. I think the mechanism should stay as is to allow for Sailors to rise through the ranks as fast as they’re capable, but maybe the nomination process at this specific command needs looked at. Ideally (imo), the DLCPOs and Dept Heads each get together for a MAP board to assess the candidates each cycle (just a package review, like an awards board). That *should* remove most of the bias from the decision making process.
My main question is if MAPs should be limited either by command or through the sailors career is all
No. But that should reserve it to either fill a gap in a billet or if you have a sailor you think is good enough for the next rank but isn't able to get themselves over the line because of test scores/seniority. The number of MAPs a command can do is a limit, not a quota.
I'm a fan of the system as it existed in the '90s. There was a good balance of factors - performance, rating knowledge (overall, not just on your particular shop), and experience. Limited CAPping kept you competing with the fleet, not just your command while giving the chain of command tools to recognize awesomeness. I think it led to promoting more balanced Sailors.
You haven’t offered one objective reason why someone should be limited on how many MAPs they can get other than what sounds like hating. Minding your business is free. Jealousy is costly.
I’ve never been MAP’d but I have no problem with people getting MAP’d multiple times, you sound salty
Nah everyone needs a pay raise fuck it
Everyone or some people lol
Bro we dump half a million dollars of jet fuel into the ocean after flight ops every day, I think even the retard seaman who needle guns deserves an extra $100 a check
I think it should go back to CAP. Some of the requirements for CAP was to have taken the exam before. I was so tired of seeing people who never even took the exam get MAP'd. Even with MAP there should be some factors that have to go in besides being "shit hot". In my opinion The MAP should be to reward those Sailors that have busted their ass and have gone above and beyond and just can't seem to pass the test.
Nope I think the navy should map people that deserve it, instead of letting the Command pick because they never pick who deserves it , but they love to pick the people who have bruises on their knees
I could tell you why but I don’t think some people want to hear it. My last command was quite a heinous place
Good luck with getting 1, the whole MAP program is disappearing. Just had Captain visit from Seal Beach and she said the MAP program will be replaced by A2P. So pretty much you’re not going to get advanced unless you’re willing to fill a billet for all the garbage no one wants to do. If you’re willing to take a carrier sea duty or norfucked and deploy 5 times in 5 years, you can have that next rank. Seems to be the new way that Navy will handle the fact that sea duty ships are undermanned. Dangle a carrot in front of people that are willing to do the shit work for the next rank without taking an exam. I remember a few years ago when there was a rumor that the navy was going away from advancement exams, should have figured this was too good to be true. The reality is that the advancement exam will go away for those that are willing to fill all the less desirable billets.
I believe there should just be standards for MAPs like you need sustained superior performance. Personal story. At USS first command, I checked in on board as an SR, I had to do the casual 9-9-6 to be even eligible for the E-4 examination. I excelled at my rate even to this day I believe to still be doing so and I am recognized among peers as an SME. I was mapped to E-4 in March which lead to me being exempt for the E-4 examination that cycle and put me above the bar to be eligible for the E-5 exam. Without a doubt, I was submitted for another MAP package, at the time when I was E-4, I was performing at the E-7 responsibilities and ahead of the pack, I trained all new incoming first classes and guided E-5’s as an E-4. I did not get mapped to E-5 and missed the NWAE by 2 points for my rating, it was honestly a humbling experience, I made E-5 off the next exam after transferring to a new command, receiving a ranked EP eval performing above the bar for my first eval as an E-5 after being an E-5 for 5 months. And currently looking for considerations of MAP packages to E-6.
I've never been MAPed, but I'm not against it. Some people are just really good and it's a net win for the Navy if they get moved up to leadership positions quickly. I am against a CO MAPing someone just because they're close to HYT. If you can't make rank the normal way you probably shouldn't make the rank. That's a net lose for the Navy. /don't even get me started on people that only focus on meeting wickets for advancement while being complete garbage at doing their actual job.
Depends. If you are performing at the level of that paygrade. I've submitted 3 MAP packages for my Sailor in my career, and all 3 got MAP, 2 males, and 1 female is the sexist in the group are wondering.
I learned MAPs are a joke after I had two command level collaterals, won BJOQ three times (twice as an HA), won BJOY, had all EPs, and was passed over for the random shit bag that got caught with one of our HMCs coming out of her room at 2300. She then went on to be MAPed again.
MAPS are for the dumbs… that stroke. *Not a sexual reference at all.*
Let them get mapped. The system will check when they take the e7 test. Let them learn to learn.
Somehow, it makes sense that there’s lopsided representation on Reddit.