How would you fix the NNPP

[Neutron Whisperer]

Interesting thing happened today.  I attended a brief at NNPTC by the Nuclear Enlisted Career Manager, some O-5 who's in charge of virtually everything regarding a nuke's career.  He had graphs galore throughout his presentation, one showing how everyone was short people (undermanned) except surface EMs.  "Why is this?" he asked.

"Because they don't do anything," everyone responded.  He agreed, emphasizing that despite their very low SRB multiples there's an excess of them..... so money obviously isn't the prime factor..... quality of life is.  And that was the point he is attempting to get across to his superiors, like the Admiral.

[joncashk]

He had graphs galore throughout his presentation, one showing how everyone was short people (undermanned) except surface EMs.  "Why is this?" he asked.  "Because they don't do anything," everyone responded.  He agreed, emphasizing that despite their very low SRB multiples there's an excess of them..... so money obviously isn't the prime factor..... quality of life is.  And that was the point he is attempting to get across to his superiors, like the Admiral.

How very true.  We are in the final stages of our EDSRA on the Enterprise.  The ET's are so undermanned that they can't afford to even one guy (me) until the very last minute.  We are on the verge of going into port and starboard duty sections for the rest of the EDSRA, which will probably last until Christmas or later.  We got told today not to make plans for Thanksgiving.  The EM's, however, have enough people to lend us SRO's for the watchbill and still support a fat watch rotation.  I love the fact that I'm transferring in a couple of weeks, I just hate that my friends are probably not going to see their families very much until after the next deployment. 

[deltarho]

You don't get manning changes for pregnant operators either...Do they still frown upon zoomies and unborn children cohabitating?

[HydroDave63]

"Because they don't do anything,"

Let them take ELT as a secondary NEC, and see how the numbers go after that

[Neutron Whisperer]

...How would you fix the NNPP... 

I submitted my point paper to the CMC today.  If anyone is interested in reading it (30 pages), then PM me with your email address and I'll send it to you.  I'm very anxious to see what comes of it.

[nbaggs]

this thread was too long to read everything so sorry if im repeating anyone, but i couldn't resist replying.

we recently had several small incidents (blazed logs, blazed maintenance, etc.) that all fell into the lack of integrity category. in order to nip this in the butt, our LCPO decided to have training on integrity. i normally would think this is a good idea. however, this particular chief is, in my opinion, where a lot of these integrity violations are coming from. in my 3 years of working for him i have seen him cover up spills, break equipment that he had no business working on in the first place, and in general run whatever division he was a part of solely based on how it will look to outside organizations. confirming my fears, our 1 hour integrity training focused on doing the right thing because were in port now and outside organizations can see us. his integrity training stressed that there is a way to do things out to sea and a way to do things in port. his final point was we need to change the perception that we have a lack of integrity.

this is why i have no interest in staying in the navy. we need to change the perception that we have a lack of integrity? NO! as a senior E-5 in my division, what i want is a workplace that allows us to change the CULTURE that expects us to "do the right thing because people are watching." i would like to work somewhere that expected people to do the right thing (with maintenance, plant operations, etc.) because they knew that those requirements and procedures are all written for a reason. proper maintenance practices and plant evolutions take more time to plan out. they are almost never accomplished on the fly. the problem is when the COC expects whatever they want done to happen instantly. what i have found is that my COC in general doesn't know the tech manuals and RPMs/SPMs as well as i do (sorry for tooting my own horn). i love nothing more than pointing out to the above LCPO that no, we cant use the GRPORS to repair AE-VXX because that manual doesnt cover non-nuke valves, etc.

a lot of these problems do go back to training. the training on my ship (although i think recently there has been an overall positive trend) still tends to be overly basic and for the most part useless. i know that the nubs showing up do need basic systems training and i could always use a refresher, but for the most part thats where it has stopped. our training deficiency log is full of for the most part, useless entries. LCPO then schedules another useless training session solely to get the training report and clear the entry on the TDL. fortunately i am now in a position that requires me to do surveillance's and i plan to do my best to get a few TDL entries on actual level of knowledge deficiencies (why is software selection important, how do we maintain cleanliness, etc.) i don't know if it will make a difference, but i'm gonna try.

i try to hold our new guys to a higher standard than i think i was held to when i got here. however, i try to do that by teaching them why the seemingly mundane details are important and how ignoring them can actually cause things to go wrong. i never kick someone out of a checkout or board because they don't know what i want them to know. instead, i explain why its important, point them in the right direction for the answer, and help them learn. this is how i would like to see the navy run, rather than a dog and pony show to outside organizations.

[Neutron_Herder]

Why is it that you can push the "shift" key to capitalize LCPO, TDL, COC, etc, and not for the first letter of a sentence?  Pet peeve of mine...

Blazed logs and maintenance are "small incidents"?

That's great that you know more than your LCPO and the rest of the COC.  Instead of telling us about it, impart your vast knowledge upon the others in your division.

I really don't know what you're trying to accomplish by posting here other than to vent.  All you can do is the best you can do.  I'm sure you're not the only one who knows what they're doing in the division, even though you're implying that you are.  I also doubt that your COC is as clueless as what you imply.

[nbaggs]

Sorry about the bad typing. Yeah, I guess that post was mostly a vent. I recently went to an FMSB school and learned a lot of things that would have been incredibly helpful when I was learning how to do this job the hard way (trying and failing, then trying again). And yeah, me and at least one other guy who went to that school are teaching everyone who cares enough to listen everything we can. However, the real point of my last comment is that this effort is contrary to what our chain of command is putting out. Since this post is in how would you fix the NNPP, my answer is I would like to see a culture change in the chain of command where there was an effort to actually fix problems rather than cover up problems from outside organizations.

Also, the incidents I mentioned were "small incidents" because we caught most of them in house. NRRO found the maintenance issue (it wasn't really blazed maintenance, but because of what ship I'm on and what the actual issue was I'd rather not go into details) and the person involved is currently one rank lower than he was and in the middle of his 60/60 half months pay for two months.

[JustinHEMI05]

I think you made some very good points, especially when you spoke about the "training" your LCPO gave. You also weren't the first, nor will you be the last, person to vent in this thread. I think your anecdote was a perfect example of what is wrong in the nuke Navy today.

[DDMurray]

this thread was too long to read everything so sorry if im repeating anyone, but i couldn't resist replying.

....

When I was an E-4 and E-5 and was treated like s%^t and witnessed crappy leadership styles, I used them as things to remember if I ever was put in a position to do something about it.  When I got my chance I did my best to remember those things. 

Guess what, the civilian world has poor leaders and bad examples too.  Stay in or get out, but don't think all the bad apples are in the NNPP.

[Marlin]

When I was an E-4 and E-5 and was treated like s%^t and witnessed crappy leadership styles, I used them as things to remember if I ever was put in a position to do something about it.  When I got my chance I did my best to remember those things. 

Guess what, the civilian world has poor leaders and bad examples too.  Stay in or get out, but don't think all the bad apples are in the NNPP.

Second that, I experienced some of the worst and the best examples of leadership in the Navy and hopefully I learned from both. The commercial world seems to have a better chance of being on the worst side but it is easier to handle because you can leave.

[Smooth Operator]

I've been out for almost 5 yrs now and looking back at all the integrity and training requirements, I honestly remember it being a dog and pony, smoke and mirrors art bazaar.

You want to know why Sailors get busted cheating on exams or falsifying exams? Because there are so goddamn many of them to take, that the test program itself becomes an exercise in paperwork, rather than a learning process. God forbid you study, take the test, and do your best, but poorly. Here comes the remediation, the re-test, the this, the that. God forbid everyone does well and you get slammed for it being too easy. Its just easier to make the results fit the expectations.

Its all well and good that the program managers at NAVSEA 08 can sit at their pretty desks and make up the rules, but in reality, when there is cleaning to do, quals, drills, training, oh yeah, and an actual vessle to operate, you create an environment where reasonable people make emotionally based decisions.

Let's see, do I risk failing this test and lose a 6 hr off to studying when I haven't slept in two days, or do I take a short cut?

Let's see, do I risk re-writing this test, or failing PO3 Nub, and losing a 6hr off to writing a remediation or re-writing a new exam, or administering a new exam, or do I take a short cut?

I remember in a given week taking and ELT test, an M-Div test, an ENG-Dep test, and in some weeks, throw in a PRE-ORSE exam, questions of the day, etc etc. It was nuts. Throw in some observed evolutions, some LOK interviews, and quals, too. Oh yeah, and standing watch, sometimes port and stbd. And sleep, maybe.

Let's also not forget the Audit and Surveillance Program, Check Chem, Observations, Seminars, bleee bleeeee blah blah blah....

Its pretty much a fantasy and I challenge anyone to tell me otherwise, because if every word written in those Short Range, Long Range, Audit and Surveillance, Observations binders was 100% Integrity like the Navy sells to Congress and each other, then that Eng Dept never slept.

100% I say, because anything less than 100% true and accurate is not the Nuclear Navy that get's sold right? 100% means every PM gets done in full accordance with the MRC, nothing is ever blazed, or assumed, every single test is administered 4.0, there is no compromising when it comes to Navy Nuclear integrity right? No subjectivity, no grey areas? Or is it just what the Chief says? What the Goat Locker protects the blue's from, what the DIV-O signs off on, what "gets handled" at the deck plate, what the Eng keeps from the XO/CO...its all a game.

Oh yeah, I also forgot the nukes had to play in all the coner drills too, so in addition to all the ORSE preps, let us not forget all the time nukes spend with ship drills, security drills, battle stations this and that.....

But no, that schedule doesn't at all lead reasonable men to make bad decisions that land them on the cover of the Navy Times questioning the integrity of the program. Must be the Sailor's fault.

[LT Dan]

Its all well and good that the program managers at NAVSEA 08 can sit at their pretty desks and make up the rules

Most ridiculous training/CTE rules are not made up by the folks at 08.  Most of the training decisions are made  at the squadron or group level.

[Smooth Operator]

Very well, I accept that.....let me rephrase....all the ass jockeys who sit around and think up new and exciting ways to train.

[arduousartifice]

Having been witness to some discussions (critiques) on how business was conducted recently, I have some comments.

First, I noticed that there is a dilution of opinion up the chain of command that, while inevitable, when punctured causes people up the chain to look down and wonder, and causes people down the chain to look up and wonder.  In this case it revolved around a department generally looking at the whole training program as a waste of time.  We were shocked the upper chain thought the program was effective, they were shocked we thought it was pointless.  I know people never gripe to their boss the way they gripe to their coworkers, but I also know that the upper chain were once JOs and heard their panelstanders gripe.  What I wonder is if maybe there isn't some very important feedback method not being employed that would allow criticism to go up the chain, instead of just down.  I know the military arguments against it, but if anyone can successfully argue that the nuclear navy is conventional military, then they can feel free to apply conventional military rationale to the problem.

But, perhaps that is the very thing that is lacking.  Is it possible that the reason these issues keep cropping up is precisely because of the lax military bearing of the nuclear navy?  Maybe it is just some proper spit and polish discipline and some "shut up and do as you're told" attitude that we need.  After all a properly disciplined operator would never BS on watch, he would study tech manuals all the time to improve himself as a watchstander.  No one with a freshly creased uniform would ever not circle-x a maintenance procedure, and so on and so on.  Maybe that's the solution.  If the sailors were properly disciplined, there would not be a need for all the requirements that are in place, they would be automatic.  Exams would not be necessary because people would consider it their duty to continuously improve their level of knowledge, monitor watches would be a thing of the past because every operator's performance would be above reproach, all those binders and duplicate and triplicate methods of tracking things would be obsolete because you would have disciplined sailors having disciplined thoughts taking disciplined actions...Okay, I can't keep that up any longer.

Anyway, feedback.  No one ever grades a captain on how his sailors perceived him, just on how he and the ship performed on inspections and how many incident reports they had.  Perhaps some feedback from the people at a command would be useful in determining if a command is actually doing right.  I know that a lot of sailors would use that as a forum to whine and complain, but that can be filtered and a lot of people will write useful comments.  The thing is, there has to be a way for it to actually be emphasized that it is taken seriously.  That's where the hard part is.  Still, I think a good judge of a successful captain is inspection performance and command opinion, both taken at their respective merits.  I have seen people who had good departments under them be hated, but have "successful" tours and go on to posts where they will make whole crews miserable, and I know you guys have, too.

I believe there can be major differences between command structures.

Squadron One seemed to be a lot less ornery than Group Two was when I served.

Totally agree.  And I will vouch for Group Two still being pretty ornery.

As far as integrity, which is the cornerstone of the nuclear navy, everyone has it in varying amounts.  I know that some people will hem and haw that they would never violate theirs, but there is no way to prove that, and I can only speak from my experience.  Culture is huge.  Most people do not possess the Navy Nuclear Program standard integrity, even many nukes.  Take that for what you will, but I believe it to be true.  A few people who instill the right culture can maintain the integrity of a department.  However, they can be undermined very easily by situations that push the department to its limits.  I remember what the culture was when I arrived on my boat.  There was a way things were done.  Some things were done 4.0, others were a 2.8 dressed up as a 4.0.  The problem with this is that inevitably someone turns in a 2.0 as a 2.8 and then questions start coming.  Is it a matter of too many requirements and too much BS, sure.  Is it also laziness and lack of integrity, to an extant.  Is it poor command leadership, maybe.  Is it a failure of communication up and down the chain, perhaps.  We've got pots and kettles arguing their colors.  Fortunately(?) it is much easier to win if you're in charge, much more difficult to see your own faults, but much simpler to judge others for theirs, even if they are partly your own fault.  So, I know I'm looking for an ideal state, one that does not and will not exist, but is it too much to ask for people to recognize what it would be and to actually work for it, even though it flies against the instincts of power.  I hope not, but I suspect it is.

Has anyone ever wondered if perhaps integrity is actually like a bank account.  I know that this is said mostly in sarcasm during integrity training, but I suspect it is much more true than people suspect.  Some people start off in the world rich and some poor.  Some people get good jobs, some don't.  You can assign factors to each stress and those are withdrawals and each reward those are deposits.  I wonder if perhaps treating integrity (and morale) like a bank account might help.  And I know, Broadzilla has an AMEX Black card paid for by the US Treasury, in case you were wondering why the nation is so in debt, look no further.

Last thought:

However, EAOS fixes all evils, real and perceived with your Navy service

This is what I pray for every day, and the other part of that sentence what I fear every day as well, may they be the lesser of the two.

[deltarho]

La-La-La, I can't hear you!

That was what first came to mind while reading the preceding post. I once had a welcome-aboard interview with the captain of a certain CGN a week after my arrival. He loved to hear himself pontificate about how successful he was as a captain, especially the quality control measures he took during his required interviews with perspective RO's and SRO's. Then he bragged how his ship had the highest reenlistment rate on the waterfront. That's when I snapped; I couldn't take it anymore.

I told him the only reason his reenlistment rate was so high was because morale was so low; everyone was reenlisting to get off the ship at their three-year point to go somewhere--anywhere--else. The veins in his neck began to bulge and his face turned crimson. I'm not sure what he said; it was unintelligible. I was kicked out of his stateroom.

Before qualifying EWS, I had to qualify as RO and SRO. He was due to transfer in eight months and so he wanted to ensure I would carry on his legacy of quality control with my ET's. I remember my SRO board alone took more than four hours. It lasted until I had a brain fart and he said, "Finally, a look up." He was in his own world....

[Gamecock]

Big promises,.....zero delivery,.....

It is my belief that the person who wrote those posts does not actually work at NR.

[JustinHEMI05]

Was my random smiting today the prompt for this reply, by chance?  I read this thread from the beginning today and hit a couple people on my way through. 

[JustinHEMI05]

I like the new disclaimer. Can we expect that to be part of every post? 

[HydroDave63]

okay, if HD 63 smites somebody that's not news,....

Hey now..... okay, i DO resemble that remark 

[Neutron Whisperer]

I've been out for almost 5 yrs now and looking back at all the integrity and training requirements, I honestly remember it being a dog and pony, smoke and mirrors art bazaar.

You want to know why Sailors get busted cheating on exams or falsifying exams? Because there are so goddamn many of them to take, that the test program itself becomes an exercise in paperwork, rather than a learning process. God forbid you study, take the test, and do your best, but poorly. Here comes the remediation, the re-test, the this, the that. God forbid everyone does well and you get slammed for it being too easy. Its just easier to make the results fit the expectations.

Its all well and good that the program managers at NAVSEA 08 can sit at their pretty desks and make up the rules, but in reality, when there is cleaning to do, quals, drills, training, oh yeah, and an actual vessle to operate, you create an environment where reasonable people make emotionally based decisions.

Let's see, do I risk failing this test and lose a 6 hr off to studying when I haven't slept in two days, or do I take a short cut?

Let's see, do I risk re-writing this test, or failing PO3 Nub, and losing a 6hr off to writing a remediation or re-writing a new exam, or administering a new exam, or do I take a short cut?

I remember in a given week taking and ELT test, an M-Div test, an ENG-Dep test, and in some weeks, throw in a PRE-ORSE exam, questions of the day, etc etc. It was nuts. Throw in some observed evolutions, some LOK interviews, and quals, too. Oh yeah, and standing watch, sometimes port and stbd. And sleep, maybe.

Let's also not forget the Audit and Surveillance Program, Check Chem, Observations, Seminars, bleee bleeeee blah blah blah....

Its pretty much a fantasy and I challenge anyone to tell me otherwise, because if every word written in those Short Range, Long Range, Audit and Surveillance, Observations binders was 100% Integrity like the Navy sells to Congress and each other, then that Eng Dept never slept.

100% I say, because anything less than 100% true and accurate is not the Nuclear Navy that get's sold right? 100% means every PM gets done in full accordance with the MRC, nothing is ever blazed, or assumed, every single test is administered 4.0, there is no compromising when it comes to Navy Nuclear integrity right? No subjectivity, no grey areas? Or is it just what the Chief says? What the Goat Locker protects the blue's from, what the DIV-O signs off on, what "gets handled" at the deck plate, what the Eng keeps from the XO/CO...its all a game.

Oh yeah, I also forgot the nukes had to play in all the coner drills too, so in addition to all the ORSE preps, let us not forget all the time nukes spend with ship drills, security drills, battle stations this and that.....

But no, that schedule doesn't at all lead reasonable men to make bad decisions that land them on the cover of the Navy Times questioning the integrity of the program. Must be the Sailor's fault.

Sounds like you're basically arguing for justified violation of one's integrity, a climate of cutting corners, or simply not doing what one is paid to do (and what constitutes what you're paid to do is not decided by you).

If the job is too hard for someone, then quit.  Get sad, smoke a joint, do whatever...but don't continue to fill a billet under the pretense that all aspects of the job are getting done.  "Toughing it out" for pride is not admirable.

This is what bothered about other ptype instructors complaining all of the time about how crappy of a "shore duty" it was.  "Well, if this is really not what you bargained for, quit.  Route a 701 form to be removed from instructor duties.  Or stop complaining," is what I wanted to say to these whiners.

The conflicts in interest that you describe above are either impossible situations or possible situations (possible to complete all tasks).  If they're impossible, then that should be addressed.  If they're possible, then they're simply difficult...but not impossible.


No one, of the almost dozen people, I emailed my paper to have replied to me.  So I guess my paper was off the mark or just a long, pointless rant?

[NukeLDO]

No one, of the almost dozen people, I emailed my paper to have replied to me.  So I guess my paper was off the mark or just a long, pointless rant?

Clarity and brevity are two of the trademarks of NNPP correspondence (and I would assume in civilian industry as well).  It is a difficult undertaking to accomplish both at the same time, particularly on a subject as emotional as this one, but it can be done.  First step, remove the emotion.  Your 30 page missive could easily be condensed into a coherent, cohesive, 5 pages using the Problem--Cause--Corrective Action format. 

[cruzcampo]

So, dudes... and dudettes...

If you like it - stay in. I appreciate your service.
If you don't like it - do your time and get out. And I'll enjoy working with you.

Notice the positive energy? We make energy.

You can't fix the Navy, it's not broke.

You can enjoy the ride.

That's just like, your opinion man.

I'm gonna pull a Gandhi on you dude.

1)Business without Ethics

The ship has it's mission but everyone working on the ship to make it run on the nuclear side of things has their own agenda.  This is true from Joe Nub E-4 to the CO.  Take a shipyard example.  Say Mr. O-6 has been tasked with getting a ship out of the shipyard in record time and he can become Mr. O-7.  He passes it down through the nuclear chain of command that this is the law, we will do this!  Dept. heads and higher up enlisted personell are really the middle men in this.  

There might be a few that have the will to fight with this directive and point out that it's a monumental undertaking either doomed for failure or just destined to be a pain in the ass based on the sheer logistics of the situation and dealing with working with several outside organizations to accomplish this, but these brave men and women who have somewhat of a clue and have attempted to align their agendas with what they view the ships mission to be are probably getting out or retiring.  Most of us have heard the stories, or been lucky enough to have that one Dept. Head, CO, or Chief who was on his last tour looking at retirement who was the most kick-ass person to work for in someone's entire Navy career.  Why?  Because they no longer had a personal agenda, or because they never had enough of one in the first place to propel their Navy career farther.

Now, most of the higher ups who value their promotions will buy off on what the CO says and push for a quick time in the shipyards.  This will, in turn greatly incense a good many on the bottom because the work conditions are crap, the hours are long, and at times they will have absolutely nothing to show for it.  So the lower ranking will take it upon themselves to fulfill their own agendas and begin to take any and all shortcuts to maximize liberty.  This actually feeds the already poor work conditions even more because others will attempt to pick up the slack, or the situation will be discovered and then the ensuing corrections and rationalizations begin.  

Ah the rationalizations.  These are what truly indicate that the system is broken down.  

"Why did you blaze off that maintenance?"  "I thought that . . ."

When really why did the person at the top rationalize setting record setting times in the shipyard as being anything more than something he was doing for himself?  Yes the mission is to safely and efficiently provide electricity and propulsion to the ship and to properly maintain the equipment necessary to do so.  The problem was that the people at the top went above and beyond, rationalized it, and in the end it does become a simple matter of the O-6 saying look what a great service I provided to the country so make me an O-7 all the while driving his lower enlisted personell into the ground.

2)  Worship without sacrifice.

What place does religion have in any of this?  Well if you read into this one it is more about humility.  Past JO's and a few fresh E-7's, how many higher ups can be named who could actually be classified as a humble servant type of leader in any branch of the military?  The number should probably be low just by the nature of the beast.  But there are those types of people out there.  There are leaders who can be friendly but not your friend, and who can sacrifice a measure of their own pride to put the crew first in order to develop a trust that they know will enable them to get the most out of them when they need it.  In order to be able to communicate and relate with a crew with a level of empathy necessary to foster a good working environment would require a great personal sacrifice.  

I know that in my post-navy experience I have been able to understand the pitfalls and hurdles that not only my boss faces, but also my employees.  If you can set yourself aside and show that you truly do understand the situation from the viewpoints of both those you work for and those who work for you, you can begin to develop a good work environment that fosters open flow of ideas and makes employees feel valued, all the while meeting with the demand of those above you.  For my own part, I never saw this even attempted in the nuclear navy, but I first read about it in the book "It's our Ship."  Slightly ironic.

I did catch the meaning behind the Navy not being broke.  

It should have read more like:  Not only is the Navy not broke but it can never be broke.

Maybe that is the best way to sum up how broke it truly is.

[DSO]

The ship has it's mission but everyone working on the ship to make it run on the nuclear side of things has their own agenda.  This is true from Joe Nub E-4 to the CO.  Take a shipyard example.  Say Mr. O-6 has been tasked with getting a ship out of the shipyard in record time and he can become Mr. O-7.  He passes it down through the nuclear chain of command that this is the law, we will do this!  Dept. heads and higher up enlisted personell are really the middle men in this.  

There might be a few that have the will to fight with this directive and point out that it's a monumental undertaking either doomed for failure or just destined to be a pain in the ass based on the sheer logistics of the situation and dealing with working with several outside organizations to accomplish this, but these brave men and women who have somewhat of a clue and have attempted to align their agendas with what they view the ships mission to be are probably getting out or retiring.  Most of us have heard the stories, or been lucky enough to have that one Dept. Head, CO, or Chief who was on his last tour looking at retirement who was the most kick-ass person to work for in someone's entire Navy career.  Why?  Because they no longer had a personal agenda, or because they never had enough of one in the first place to propel their Navy career farther.

Now, most of the higher ups who value their promotions will buy off on what the CO says and push for a quick time in the shipyards.  This will, in turn greatly incense a good many on the bottom because the work conditions are crap, the hours are long, and at times they will have absolutely nothing to show for it.  So the loer ranking will take it upon themselves to fulfill their own agendas and begin to take any and all shortcuts to maximize liberty.  This actually leeds the already poor work conditions even more because others will attempt to pick up the slack, or the situation will be discovered and then the ensuing corrections and rationalizations begin.  

Ah the rationalizations.  These are what truly indicate that the system is broken down.  

"Why did you blaze off that maintenance?"  "I thought that . . ."

When really why did the person at the top rationalize setting record setting times in the shipyard as being anything more than something he was doing for himself?  Yes the mission is to safely and efficiently provide electricity and propulsion to the ship and to properly maintain the equipment necessary to do so.  The problem was that the people at the top went above and beyond, rationalized it, and in the end it does become a simple matter of the O-6 saying look what a great service I provided to the country so make me an O-7 all the while driving his lower enlisted personell into the ground.

2)  Worship without sacrifice.

What place does religion have in any of this?  Well if you read into this one it is more about humility.  Past JO's and a few fresh E-7's, how many higher ups can be named who could actually be classified as a humble servant type of leader in any branch of the military?  The number should probably be low just by the nature of the beast.  But there are those types of people out there.  There are leaders who can be friendly but not your friend, and who can sacrifice a measure of their own pride to put the crew first in order to develop a trust that they know will enable them to get the most out of them when they need it.  In order to be able to communicate and relate with a crew with a level of empathy necessary to foster a good working environment would require a great personal sacrifice.  

I know that in my post-navy experience I have been able to understand the pitfalls and hurdles that not only my boss faces, but also my employees.  If you can set yourself aside and show that you truly do understand the situation from the viewpoints of both those you work for and those who work for you, you can begin to develop a good work environment that fosters open flow of ideas and makes employees feel valued, all the while meeting with the demand of those above you.  For my own part, I never saw this even attempted in the nuclear navy, but I first read about it in the book "It's our Ship."  Slightly ironic.

I did catch the meaning behind the Navy not being broke.  

It should have read more like:  Not only is the Navy not broke but it can never be broke.

Maybe that is the best way to sum up how broke it truly is.



[/quote]I would love to see some of these careerists do the same asinine things they did in the Navy while on the outside with a labor budget...I dare you to make me work all that time and pay 1.5x or 2.0x. Of course they could only handle leading people that are all on salary so that they could still abuse them without regards to what it will cost the company monetarily.

[HydroDave63]

I would love to see some of these careerists do the same asinine things they did in the Navy while on the outside with a labor budget...I dare you to make me work all that time and pay 1.5x or 2.0x. Of course they could only handle leading people that are all on salary so that they could still abuse them without regards to what it will cost the company monetarily.

Essentially, the inflated Proto bonuses, gigantic SRB's (compared to us high EFPH sailors of yesteryear), and high lifetime SRB cap reflects that the "cost" to the Nav is comparable to paying 1.5x or 2.0x as input, but pushed into fewer billets. Rickover must be at synchronous speed by now...