Enlisted vs. Officer

[sfrederick]

Would being a nuclear officer be better or worse experience for working in the civilian sector?  Would an enlisted person with a bachelor's degree be more or less valuable?
I'd think that an officer would know less about the job than the enlisted person who is actually doing the work.
Any input?

[JustinHEMI05]

Would being a nuclear officer be better or worse experience for working in the civilian sector?  Would an enlisted person with a bachelor's degree be more or less valuable?
I'd think that an officer would know less about the job than the enlisted person who is actually doing the work.
Any input?

Either way, you are just entry level. To put it another way, I am a degreed enlisted EOOW/EWS and I have officers starting at the same level as me. Sometimes less depending on the job. Now, I will say that is true if the officer is a JO getting out as an LT qualified engineer. If you go on with your officer career and say, do a department head tour, things might change some. But, there are folks here that just simply say NAVY = ENTRY LEVEL, and to some degree, I think they are right. But, I will submit that ADM Bowman wasn't entry level when he got out. In fact, I think he went straight to CEO of NEI. But that is not you or most people getting out. The regular full career ogangers will probably be better off too, but in the time you spent in the navy, you could have risen even furthur on the outside. To boil it all down, really, there is no difference between degreed enlisted EWS/JO getting out.

Justin

PS Right now, you can even drop the degree off of enlisted if you are talking about operations at some places.

[ddklbl]

Either way, you are just entry level.

You know, that thought process really pisses me off.  I'm not picking on you Justin, and I don't think you meant any malice by it, but there are a lot of people that say that on this board with a sense of negative connotation.  From an OPS perspective, everyone is entry level when they start a new job.  Case in point:

Licensed PWR SRO gets hired on at another PWR.

Licensed PWR SRO gets hired on at a BWR.

Navy vet gets hired on at a PWR.

Licensed BWR guy decides to join the Navy.

Where do each of these guys start off at their new job?  They all start off in "Entry Level" training.  To say that someone is only entry level isn't a statement of any real significance on your part.  And, regardless of what anyone says, past performance does not guarantee future results.  I've seen several multiple license operators who I don't trust in their current capacity. 

I'm not throwing any stones at you, Justin.  Just an observation on my part that you fell victim to.

So, my contribution to the original post, which doesn't really depart from what's already been said both here and above:  Unless you stay in for 20 and gain experience at executive level management it won't matter one bit.

[ddklbl]

Regardless of the likelihood or the number of jokes you make, none of it makes the statement less valid.

[JustinHEMI05]

You know, that thought process really pisses me off.  I'm not picking on you Justin, and I don't think you meant any malice by it, but there are a lot of people that say that on this board with a sense of negative connotation.  From an OPS perspective, everyone is entry level when they start a new job.  Case in point:

Licensed PWR SRO gets hired on at another PWR.

Licensed PWR SRO gets hired on at a BWR.

Navy vet gets hired on at a PWR.

Licensed BWR guy decides to join the Navy.

Where do each of these guys start off at their new job?  They all start off in "Entry Level" training.  To say that someone is only entry level isn't a statement of any real significance on your part.  And, regardless of what anyone says, past performance does not guarantee future results.  I've seen several multiple license operators who I don't trust in their current capacity. 

I'm not throwing any stones at you, Justin.  Just an observation on my part that you fell victim to.

So, my contribution to the original post, which doesn't really depart from what's already been said both here and above:  Unless you stay in for 20 and gain experience at executive level management it won't matter one bit.

I disagree in that as an entry level SRO, I have little say in my pay and benefits. When I get my license, and want to go somewhere else, I will be deciding my pay and benefits. Thats whats really meant by it. That is entry level. And I also disagree that even previously licensed individuals attending ILT are entry level. Sure, they have to go through the training again, but they will be trusted and relied upon way... WAY sooner than you or I. They will likely be looked at for more "important" jobs first, too.  And, they are getting paid a lot more than me. But you're right in that its negative connotation, I will choose different words when this comes up for the 1 millionth time. Also, thanks for agree with me in the end.

Justin

PS I have no problems being entry level at this point in my career. I think, perhaps, more people should embrace their reality and enjoy it while they can. Because when you are no long entry level, life only seems to get more difficult/stressful.

[Nuclear NASCAR]

Would being a nuclear officer be better or worse experience for working in the civilian sector?  Would an enlisted person with a bachelor's degree be more or less valuable?
I'd think that an officer would know less about the job than the enlisted person who is actually doing the work.
Any input?

I know this sounds like dancing around it a little but it depends on what work you're looking at doing in the private sector.  An officer might be more acclimated to the daily B.S. that gets high level decisions made while not completely understanding the work that's being done or the frustration being experienced by those he supervises, if he goes that route. 

An enlisted person with a bachelors degree could be considered more valuable in some situations, both in management or as a worker on the shop floor.  Due to their background they might be able to "translate" between worker bee and mid to upper management and vice versa. 

Could you give an idea of which route you are thinking of?  By the way, Welcome to Nukeworker and Thanks for your service to our country!

Tom

[ddklbl]

What I am saying, in regard to the original post, is there is no difference between officer and enlisted on the outside for those who do a short stint and bolt. 

What I am saying about the entry level charge, is it is a pointless argument.  As crass a notion would be for a commercial guy to join the navy, his license doesn't give him any different edge than anyone else.  He is entry level.  For a navy guy hiring on at a utility, he is entry level.  For a PWR SRO to hire on at a BWR, he too is entry level because his current license does not transfer; he too has to start from the beginning.  Entry level is a useless, hollow phrase that only describes the obvious.  Recertification requires you to start from the beginning.  People on this board use it as a divisive and demeaning argument to suggest that there is some sort of class system in power plant operations based solely on your previous experience.  Nope, prior commercial and prior navy guys qualify the same position, work the same shift, probably getting paid near the same salary when things are said and done.

As far as the trust issue goes, I agree that previous commercial guys are quicker to earn the trust, but that's dangerous and unwarranted.  How many times, Justin, did an 18 year Chief, who was trusted more than the dirty blue shirt, screw the pooch standing EDO because of the commands misplaced confidence in his "experience".  Was his trust warranted by deference to his previous experience on other platforms? 

[JustinHEMI05]

What I am saying, in regard to the original post, is there is no difference between officer and enlisted on the outside for those who do a short stint and bolt. 

What I am saying about the entry level charge, is it is a pointless argument.  As crass a notion would be for a commercial guy to join the navy, his license doesn't give him any different edge than anyone else.  He is entry level.  For a navy guy hiring on at a utility, he is entry level.  For a PWR SRO to hire on at a BWR, he too is entry level because his current license does not transfer; he too has to start from the beginning.  Entry level is a useless, hollow phrase that only describes the obvious.  Recertification requires you to start from the beginning.  People on this board use it as a divisive and demeaning argument to suggest that there is some sort of class system in power plant operations based solely on your previous experience.  Nope, prior commercial and prior navy guys qualify the same position, work the same shift, probably getting paid near the same salary when things are said and done.

As far as the trust issue goes, I agree that previous commercial guys are quicker to earn the trust, but that's dangerous and unwarranted.  How many times, Justin, did an 18 year Chief, who was trusted more than the dirty blue shirt, screw the pooch standing EDO because of the commands misplaced confidence in his "experience".  Was his trust warranted by deference to his previous experience on other platforms? 

I think this thread has quickly taken a turn in a direction it wasn't supposed to go. At this point, I will just agree to disagree and shut up.

Justin

[mlslstephens]

I think this thread has quickly taken a turn in a direction it wasn't supposed to go. At this point, I will just agree to disagree and shut up.

Justin

Did you watch the video?  I'm proud of you Justin.  Here's some Karma your way. 

[JustinHEMI05]

Did you watch the video?  I'm proud of you Justin.  Here's some Karma your way. 

No it has nothing to do with the video, but sometimes its just pointless to argue, especially if the argument has nothing to do with the actual topic. And, I just really didn't have it in me to carry this one on anymore Thanks for the K

Justin

[Fermi2]

I was an SRO and SM at a BWR, when I left it for the PWR World I had to license as an SRO but I was hardly entry level and while in the training program it was expected I'd take more responsibility and do more things than a NUB Zero who had never operated anything but a startup source.

I have a very good clue as to how to determine whether a position is entry level. Find an Org Chart, find the top guy then follow the solid lines all the way till you find the guy on the bottom. That person would be the entry level position. Pretty neat eh?

Mike

[sfrederick]

I know this sounds like dancing around it a little but it depends on what work you're looking at doing in the private sector.  An officer might be more acclimated to the daily B.S. that gets high level decisions made while not completely understanding the work that's being done or the frustration being experienced by those he supervises, if he goes that route. 

An enlisted person with a bachelors degree could be considered more valuable in some situations, both in management or as a worker on the shop floor.  Due to their background they might be able to "translate" between worker bee and mid to upper management and vice versa. 

Could you give an idea of which route you are thinking of?  By the way, Welcome to Nukeworker and Thanks for your service to our country!

Tom

I'm just starting MM A-School.  I'm most likely going to go the enlisted route, I was just trying to get a bit more information before I decided on whether or not to bother with the officer package.  If I get selected for ELT, I think I'd be interested in a QA job.  If I don't, I really have no clue what I'd do with the MM experience.  Also, I've got an AAS in MET already.  Would it be a wise idea to continue toward a BS in ME, NE, or both (With MM or ELT experience)?

Also, I don't think the thread has gotten too off topic.  All of the information I've read has been helpful.

[JustinHEMI05]

I'm just starting MM A-School.  I'm most likely going to go the enlisted route, I was just trying to get a bit more information before I decided on whether or not to bother with the officer package.  If I get selected for ELT, I think I'd be interested in a QA job.  If I don't, I really have no clue what I'd do with the MM experience.  Also, I've got an AAS in MET already.  Would it be a wise idea to continue toward a BS in ME, NE, or both (With MM or ELT experience)?

Also, I don't think the thread has gotten too off topic.  All of the information I've read has been helpful.

See it really depends... do you want a career in the navy or do you want to do your 6 and get out? If you want a career, I recommend going for officer. If you just want to do some time to get your foot in the door on the outside, I say stay enlisted, qualify everything you can and of course finish your degree if you have the time and means. Its always a good idea to have a degree in your back pocket if you can, just in case. But, you would be OK without it, too.

Good luck!

Justin

[Loffy Muffin]

for commerical nuke ops: six and split...
 the ABET degree will not make enough of a difference to be worth the time/effort for you to get the degree. You can get the McDegree from one of these online things, get into an NLO/SRO class and not look back. 

Forget NE unless you just love Nuclear.  ME is more flexiable.

General all purpose go anywhere engineering:
Other sectors (manufacturing/oil gas, EPC), you need a degree.  the online degree will not do it..Staff engineer at a plant, you need a degree.

Love the Navy and want to make it a career ():
Go officer.  Enlisted stinks.  Bad.  Unless you love  cleaning bilges 60 hours a week to make some dork engineering officer look good for his next promotion.  While you are at it, get into something cool like flying jets.  Nuke Navy is long, boring, hours.  Not fun officer or enlisted.  Flying jets compared to standing a watch on a sub?  Please.

[Marlin]

I1) Give me 200 feet and 400 knots (in the military) or

I'm pretty sure that 400 knots is outside the safe operating envelope at any depth.

[PapaBear765]

As far as the trust issue goes, I agree that previous commercial guys are quicker to earn the trust, but that's dangerous and unwarranted.  How many times, Justin, did an 18 year Chief, who was trusted more than the dirty blue shirt, screw the pooch standing EDO because of the commands misplaced confidence in his "experience".  Was his trust warranted by deference to his previous experience on other platforms? 

It got so bad on my boat while in the yards that the only guys who were allowed to stand EDPO were the two E-6's and the one E-8.  The other chiefs and the EDMC had all been given the qual cards with everything but the interviews deleted, on the assumption that since they're chiefs they'll be fine, and they caused more incident reports than anyone else.

[Fermi2]

I agree, get an ME, it is more flexible.

I'm confused about one thing, what the hell does being an ELT have to do with getting a QA Job?

Mike

[sfrederick]

I agree, get an ME, it is more flexible.

I'm confused about one thing, what the hell does being an ELT have to do with getting a QA Job?

Mike

Not sure what to say to that one.  Haha.  Monitoring reactor safety and testing water sounds kinda like Quality Assurance to me, but I'm only in A-School and don't know much about the job yet so...

[Fermi2]

Not sure what to say to that one.  Haha.  Monitoring reactor safety and testing water sounds kinda like Quality Assurance to me, but I'm only in A-School and don't know much about the job yet so...

You're right, you're a NUB who knows nothing about nuclear power, I'm a former ELT who somehow has managed to obtain 3 license from the NRC. In about 15 to 18 months you'll be qualified to comment.

QA and ELT are not related, they are totally different functions.

Mike

[JustinHEMI05]

You're right, you're a NUB who knows nothing about nuclear power, I'm a former ELT who somehow has managed to obtain 3 license from the NRC. In about 15 to 18 months you'll be qualified to comment.

QA and ELT are not related, they are totally different functions.

Mike

Talk about shooting the innocent in the face. I don't think he meant any malice by confusing QA and ELT.

Justin

[Gamecock]

You're right, you're a NUB who knows nothing about nuclear power, I'm a former ELT who somehow has managed to obtain 3 license from the NRC. In about 15 to 18 months you'll be qualified to comment.

QA and ELT are not related, they are totally different functions.

Mike

Ligthen up, Francis!!

[LDO4CNO]

I'm just starting MM A-School.  I'm most likely going to go the enlisted route, I was just trying to get a bit more information before I decided on whether or not to bother with the officer package.  If I get selected for ELT, I think I'd be interested in a QA job.  If I don't, I really have no clue what I'd do with the MM experience.  Also, I've got an AAS in MET already.  Would it be a wise idea to continue toward a BS in ME, NE, or both (With MM or ELT experience)?

Also, I don't think the thread has gotten too off topic.  All of the information I've read has been helpful.

Shipmate,

As I was reading this thread, I was thinking of how I may be able to convince you an Officer Program is right for you.  Then I came across your last entry.  You answered your own question here.  As long as you consider applying for the program as “A BOTHER”, you need not pursue it.   Remain enlisted, get some experience (AT SEA), then reevaluate.  Your career decisions need to be based on far more than the difficulty of the application process.

JB

[PapaBear765]

You're right, you're a NUB who knows nothing about nuclear power, I'm a former ELT who somehow has managed to obtain 3 license from the NRC. In about 15 to 18 months you'll be qualified to comment.

QA and ELT are not related, they are totally different functions.

Mike

Wow, talk about unnecessary.  Once again Mike is trying prove how much more of a man he is than the rest of us. 

Mike your comments are becoming less entertaining with each successive post.  Speaking for myself, I'd like to ask you to just not post at all unless you have something constructive to say.  Thank you.

[Fermi2]

I found the lads tone to be patronizing. Prior to ASSUMING ELT was analogous to QA he should have asked his compadres and staff instructors what QA is. It's what I would have done and what I would expect of anyone.

Had he posted the following: What is the difference between verifying water chemistry and Quality Assurance I would have given the non qual a nice answer.

When I see people posting on assumption then saying well I might not know this quite yet, then I get a bit miffed because if you weren't sure you knew it then why did you open your big mouth.

Speak from knowledge, not assumption.

Mike

[PapaBear765]

I found the lads tone to be patronizing. Prior to ASSUMING ELT was analogous to QA he should have asked his compadres and staff instructors what QA is. It's what I would have done and what I would expect of anyone.

Had he posted the following: What is the difference between verifying water chemistry and Quality Assurance I would have given the non qual a nice answer.

When I see people posting on assumption then saying well I might not know this quite yet, then I get a bit miffed because if you weren't sure you knew it then why did you open your big mouth.

Speak from knowledge, not assumption.

Mike

Well, I for one will try to adhere to your preferences whenever I post in these forums.