All ELT's, please do not be offended, for I am only seeking to be informed.

[PotentialNuke]

I am wondering why the position of ELT is considered the "best" position to have in the Nuclear Navy? I have read a few posts that have contained references to this, ergo sparking my curiosity as to why this rate is so "esteemed". I do not intend to belittle any rate, as I have not even been to RTC yet.

[RDTroja]

From Merriam-Webster On-Line:

Main Entry: chau·vin·ism
Pronunciation: \ˈshō-və-ˌni-zəm\
Function: noun
Etymology: French chauvinisme, from Nicolas Chauvin, character noted for his excessive patriotism and devotion to Napoleon in Théodore and Hippolyte Cogniard's play La Cocarde tricolore (1831)
Date: 1851
1 : excessive or blind patriotism — compare jingoism
2 : undue partiality or attachment to a group or place to which one belongs or has belonged
3 : an attitude of superiority toward members of the opposite sex; also : behavior expressive of such an attitude

Disclaimer: I have never been in the Navy, but have worked with thousands who have been, many of whom were ELTs. This is not an attack on any group or individual, just a likely answer to the original question. I am confident that this will be disputed... by the ELTs.

[JustinHEMI05]

They're not. ELTs are stupid, ugly and their mother's hate them  Oh, I was an ELT. 

@Marssim +1

[Content1]

ELT's  are the top of the food chain of Navy Nukes.   In ancient Greece similar people lived on Mt. Olympus.   They are generally nice to the non-Elt's but don't challenge them or you'll be sorry.   Only a certain few ever become ELT's, and they are prized in the Nuclear industry when they leave the Navy.

[crusemm]

I just want to say, an ELT was the only person I ever saw insert a glass stirring rod int an unmentionable (and potentially very painful) place.  Therefore, if they are the best of the Navy Nukes...what the hell does that say about the rest of us?

[retired nuke]

I just want to say, an ELT was the only person I ever saw insert a glass stirring rod int an unmentionable (and potentially very painful) place.  Therefore, if they are the best of the Navy Nukes...what the hell does that say about the rest of us?

And why the heck were you watching
 

[crusemm]

HD, because it was WESTPAC day IDK, on the mid watch, I was off going and bored, and someone bet him $5 he wouldn't do it.  In that situation, why the heck wouldn't I watch it.  The only other entertainment options were "Major Payne" for the 40th time, or 4 year old Penthouse forums.

[crusemm]

It's like, when you know the train wreck is gonna happen, you can't not watch it.

[Content1]

HD, because it was WESTPAC day IDK, on the mid watch, I was off going and bored, and someone bet him $5 he wouldn't do it.  In that situation, why the heck wouldn't I watch it.  The only other entertainment options were "Major Payne" for the 40th time, or 4 year old Penthouse forums.

I don't think I ever saw or wanted to see someone's unmentionable while on a sub.   Since my lead 1st Class was a big version of one, didn't see the need to see any more of them.

[Neutron_Herder]

I am wondering why the position of ELT is considered the "best" position to have in the Nuclear Navy? I have read a few posts that have contained references to this, ergo sparking my curiosity as to why this rate is so "esteemed". I do not intend to belittle any rate, as I have not even been to RTC yet.

"Esteemed" might be the wrong word...  Generally, Active Duty ELT's are the only ones with enough energy at the end of the day (usually about 9am for them) to spend time on the internet discussing their "jobs".  I'm actually surprised that there aren't more EM's on here, as they routinely beat the ELT's off of the boat!   

All kidding aside, IMHO you can't pick a "bad" rate as a nuke.  It's not the rate that's respected, it's the person.  Look at what each rate is responsible for and pick one that interests you.  Then work your a$$ off and it will pay off greatly...  It doesn't matter whether you do 6 years or 30 years, just do the best you can for the time that you're there.

I must say that I'm rather partial to being an ET, but that could just be a little Stockholm Syndrome kicking in since I was an ET for 21 years.

[Samabby]

Potential, always keep in mind that the needs of the Navy will generally determine your Nuke speciality. Good luck, son. 

[HydroDave63]

One excellent distillation and precipitate! !

[Preciousblue1965]

I had a mathmatical explanation for all the different rates, but can't seem to find what I did with it on here.

[HydroDave63]

I had a mathmatical explanation for all the different rates, but can't seem to find what I did with it on here.

I'm sure that by the next Administration and PC-indoctrinated Admirals, the different rates will be shuffled and be renamed:

Paladin
Thief
Magic-User
Cleric
-and-
Half-Elf Archer

 

[Preciousblue1965]

I'm sure that by the next Administration and PC-indoctrinated Admirals, the different rates will be shuffled and be renamed:

Paladin
Thief
Magic-User
Cleric
-and-
Half-Elf Archer

 

You forgot to add Ogre(MM)

[crusemm]

You forgot to add Ogre(MM)

No no no, the Ogre's are A-Gangers, Trolls are Torpedomen, Dark elves are the ST's...
Paladin's are obviously straight MM's
Magic users are ET's
Cleric's are ELT's (Praying at the Sink)
Thieve's are EM's.

But the absolute rulers of all are the geeks that dress up in raincoats on weekends and play Vampire and have Magic decks.

[fiveeleven]

Cros screwed defined: Sketch charge/discharge then animate a primary add,and while we're here how bout an ORT followed by an overboard discharge. Good, now lets sketch RPFW and animate normal lineup then a quick look at plant cooldown. Good, now a short glance at main feed and lets talk about lighting off one of the old sow MFPs. Good, now lets jot down all of our sound powered phone circuits, primary/secondary functions and some jack locations. But, but I wanna be an ELT not an EM..wah. I still remember EM2 ******'s name,and I still hate him. Class 7902 AIW. MM2/ELT USS NIMITZ CVN-68 80-84. bohica.

[hamsamich]

when I was in prototype (1989) it was top 25%.

[Gamecock]

when I was in prototype (1989) it was top 25%.

Its not anymore to 25% anymore.  We take all GPAs now for ELT.

Cheers,
GC

[HydroDave63]

No no no, the Ogre's are A-Gangers, Trolls are Torpedomen, Dark elves are the ST's...
Paladin's are obviously straight MM's
Magic users are ET's
Cleric's are ELT's (Praying at the Sink)
Thieve's are EM's.

But the absolute rulers of all are the geeks that dress up in raincoats on weekends and play Vampire and have Magic decks.

And the Nucleonics Lab of 2020 will have no reagent bottles or chemicals, just some fancy digital analyzers, some 20-sided and 8-sided dice, and 3-D VR goggles to play WoW and Avatar: The Tree People Strike Back review the computer analyses?   

[crusemm]

And the Nucleonics Lab of 2020 will have no reagent bottles or chemicals, just some fancy digital analyzers, some 20-sided and 8-sided dice, and 3-D VR goggles to play WoW and Avatar: The Tree People Strike Back review the computer analyses?   

Not too far off now with auto titrators

[fiveeleven]

What ? No more opportunities to train the M-Divvers on the benefits of  making the level in the AgNO3 bottles go down at least weekly. What a shame-how will the location of the raisin-jack fermentation station be known to the primary siders. Question - Is the main machinery LPO still a nuke ? I understood why this was, but of the ones I knew, they tended not to be happy shipmates.

[Marlin]

   The ELT qualification has undergone a number of changes over the years. The first weren't even an engineering rate it was the boats Corpsman. Mechanics (ELTs) eventually took over radiological and chemistry responsibilities and when TLD's were introduced the MM ELTs took over dosimetry. Prior to that, the Corpsman read and reported exposure from film badges, we did help read the film density and count neutron recoil tracks on the film but it was primarily the Corpsmans job. The film badges were developed in the ELTs nucleonics lab the same place were pictures taken through the periscope were developed. Becoming a nuke was determined by your GCT/ARI score then rating assigned by your request and by aptitude tests. It was a likely that you were assigned to an electrical rating due to lack of mechanical aptitude as it was by presence of electrical/electronic aptitude. For a short period of time EMs and ICman were selected as ELTs but the additional splitting of responsibilities across divisional lines made this impractical.
   I am sure that it will continue to evolve with the "Needs of Navy". My personal experience of success of Nukes after the Navy seems to show a higher success rate of ELTs in many fields not just commercial power. Here in Oak Ridge I am aware of a company owner, President, and Chief Operating Officer that were exELTs (also ex Fast Attack submarine sailors  ).

  The debate may continue but being an exELT Fast Attack sailor myself my ego demands that I acknowledge the truth as I know it and proffer the exalted rate of ELT as Best of the Best. 

[co60slr]

I am wondering why the position of ELT is considered the "best" position to have in the Nuclear Navy? I have read a few posts that have contained references to this, ergo sparking my curiosity as to why this rate is so "esteemed". I do not intend to belittle any rate, as I have not even been to RTC yet.

Most Sailors believe "their rate" is the best.  It's simply a matter of "Pride" which is what you'll find attached to your thread here.   The stories of "how it was done back in MY day" are mildly informative, but always entertaining.  We all have our stories.

Perhaps the unbiased answer (although difficult) is to say that ALL rates are important.   Running a Nuclear Power Plant is very complicated with countless requirements that have to be met.  If your [Insert your favorite rate here] doesn't do his/her job, than there are dozens of scenarios that will keep a Naval Vessel tied to the pier...shutdown and cooled down.  Do "ELTs save the day?" ...no.  Not anymore than other nuclear engineering rates.

I've met ELTs that are completely miserable in the jobs and ETs that are happy to skip to work on their way to the next Deployment.

What matters the most is what do YOU hope to get our of your Nuclear Navy career?   Where do ELTs work on the "outside" after 6 years?  What does the ELT career ladder look like if you stay in for 20-30 years?  Is the RCT lifestyle for you...assuming you go on to RCTQS?  Is the Health Physicist an interest to you?   

For the old-timers on here...just how many ELTs does it take to "field day Nucleonics" during a boat-wide field day?  ;-)

Co60

[Marlin]

Most Sailors believe "their rate" is the best.  It's simply a matter of "Pride" which is what you'll find attached to your thread here.   The stories of "how it was done back in MY day" are mildly informative, but always entertaining.  We all have our stories.

Perhaps the unbiased answer (although difficult) is to say that ALL rates are important.   Running a Nuclear Power Plant is very complicated with countless requirements that have to be met.  If your [Insert your favorite rate here] doesn't do his/her job, than there are dozens of scenarios that will keep a Naval Vessel tied to the pier...shutdown and cooled down.  Do "ELTs save the day?" ...no.  Not anymore than other nuclear engineering rates.

I've met ELTs that are completely miserable in the jobs and ETs that are happy to skip to work on their way to the next Deployment.

What matters the most is what do YOU hope to get our of your Nuclear Navy career?   Where do ELTs work on the "outside" after 6 years?  What does the ELT career ladder look like if you stay in for 20-30 years?  Is the RCT lifestyle for you...assuming you go on to RCTQS?  Is the Health Physicist an interest to you? 
Co60

Does anyone hear a puppy barking? Maybe just ELT envy. 

For the old-timers on here...just how many ELTs does it take to "field day Nucleonics" during a boat-wide field day?  ;-)
Co60

All of them if they can get away with it. 

[Marvin]

How many ELT's does it take to field day nucleonics?

Depends.......

Only one if you can use real ammonia and a mask.  Comes clean really fast.

Sure hope this doesn't give any of those young fellas any ideas.

[playswithairplanes]

Where would you ever get the idea that an ELT was the best?  SMAG's, all of them...

ELT - L(oser) = ET; finest rate in God's Navy. 

Werd. If all the zeros drop dead, whose the man in charge of the plant?  The RO, yup... there you go.

There's this myth thing that Smags are the best, but that's because they do the least. They skate. When there's something to be done... whoops, I gotta go check something in Nucleonics. Field day, they all fight to be in Nucleonics... where nobody watches. The ELT doesn't stand watch, but occaisonally comes back to the plant for a sample (seems like today, just to raidio the sample anyway, sadly). When refit rolls around... oh, I gotta go find radcon gear... yea... right. Or they do that 10 hr RAM transfer thing and hang out on the tender the 9hrs 45 mins doing "paperwork". Hmmm...

I'm just joking. Smags are by and large good people. Usually the homebrewers too. It was a Smag that got me hooked on homebrewing.

[goobs22xx]

Werd. If all the zeros drop dead, whose the man in charge of the plant?  The RO, yup... there you go.

If by RO you mean the EWS (who can come from any rate), then sure.

And an ET calling out smags for being skaters....priceless.


To the OP, everybody rate bashes. Its all in good fun (see above ). And most people understand that every rate is important and serves a specific purpose, without which, the plant couldn't be run correctly.

[rumrunner]

I fondly recall a watch on CVN-68 during our return to Norfolk from the Med, where by some freak of nature we ELTs were pretty much running #2 Plant.  The PPWO was the RL Division Officer, the PPWS was the Leading ELT, and we had ELTs at every MM station on the reactor side.  I was the Feed Pump watch (my first one after finally getting signed off).  It was (as expected) a flawless watch with perfect logs and no plant transients.  However, since this caused a serious disruption in our daily Spades tournament being held in the RL Division Office we immediately undertook efforts to ensure that this watch rotation never again occurred.  I later learned that the RO (Reactor Officer - equal to the Engineering Officer for you non-carrier types) was pleased. 

[fiveeleven]

 Hey airplane guy-All stop there shipmate.To implicate your brothers in a public forum on a topic such as radioing logs is a pretty serious thing. I know you'll say just kidding, but that's bs too. While on topic- cardinal sin commited-erroneous use of the English language whilst harpooning your shipmates. Could result in at least 2-3 pages of pounding in the divisional fun log. It could go something like - when you say "raidio" what do you mean ? Would this be like the thing at Entebbe or perhaps an insect repellent related thing. Or maybe yo great grandaddy rode with Quantrell. I also think port and starboard rotation on a 2 month N. Atlantic cruise counts for standing watches. And who did all the ETs come a crying to when they wanted their scivvies to be white again ? Thats right- the wizards running the in-plant laundry service unbeknownst to but a few selected  watchstanders - oh yeah- that would mean the ELT must have been on watch to coordinate the midnight cofferdam recirc. with the RO and the charging station MM. The slight level increase in the tank ? An insurge followed by and outsurge led to some shrink followed by some swell and dont bother us when laundry is being passed out cause ours is done and white and I am longing for my pit and the lullaby of them screws a turning. Night,night.

[cruzcampo]

I just want to say, an ELT was the only person I ever saw insert a glass stirring rod int an unmentionable (and potentially very painful) place.  Therefore, if they are the best of the Navy Nukes...what the hell does that say about the rest of us?

We had an electrician do it.  Then he meger'ed (if that's even a word) the same area to see if the resistance changed.

There was an ELT who did attempt to perform surgery on himself in the form of removing hemorrhoids with a Gerber.

[fiveeleven]

The urge to perform bladder soundings-must go with the breed.An ELT on 68 was trying to depart his obligated time early.This is the truth-attempted a level check with a piece of wire, and upon removal left some insulation in his tubing and reported to the duty corpsman(I carpooled with the corpsman back/forth to NJ).This act did not get him what he wanted, so one fine morning in one plant(pierside-S/G's in WLU) after calculating a 98 ml CHEMICAL add he proceeded to perform a 980 ml addition.Makeup water trucks were lined up all the way to serv-mart. He got his discharge.

[LivinginParadise]

To the OP, everybody rate bashes. Its all in good fun (see above ). And most people understand that every rate is important and serves a specific purpose, without which, the plant couldn't be run correctly.

Let me Elaborate on that. Everyone who's BTDT and "rates" to bitch about other rates does so. Non-rated A-School trash, non-qual boat trash, and any pipeline trash in between need not apply, lest you really want a size 12 up your ass...

[JDLong]

Anyone who gets stuck in ERF for 6 years, would obviously be delusional and get grand ideas of being really important and the "best".

[modex]

Manning on some boats necessitates that ERF is manned by 3/4 elt's or 3/3 elt's. Thus the ELT's would be stuck in ERF for their entire tours. I understand that around a decade ago M-Div and RL-Div manning was much higher than it is now, but that is no longer the case.
If you want to make E-7, go ET. If you are satisfied with the worst promotion rates out of all nuclear rates, go ELT.

[Gamecock]

Manning on some boats necessitates that ERF is manned by 3/4 elt's or 3/3 elt's. Thus the ELT's would be stuck in ERF for their entire tours. I understand that around a decade ago M-Div and RL-Div manning was much higher than it is now, but that is no longer the case.
If you want to make E-7, go ET. If you are satisfied with the worst promotion rates out of all nuclear rates, go ELT.

ELT is not a rate....

You are a MM first.  ELT is a collateral duty.  So, if you are a good MM, with an important collateral duty, then you get a good eval....and you make chief early.

  Its those guys who just want to sit around in nucleonics and whine and complain about not getting advanced that never make chief.

Cheers,
GC

[DDMurray]

Manning on some boats necessitates that ERF is manned by 3/4 elt's or 3/3 elt's. Thus the ELT's would be stuck in ERF for their entire tours. I understand that around a decade ago M-Div and RL-Div manning was much higher than it is now, but that is no longer the case.
If you want to make E-7, go ET. If you are satisfied with the worst promotion rates out of all nuclear rates, go ELT.

This has got to be some of the worst advice ever given on NW.   Show me the statistics that back up this claim.  I can give you examples of guys in all rates that made Chief early and/or were selected for LDO.   Job performance is the biggest factor in advancement.

Besides, all right-thinking nukes know that EM is the best rate.

[playswithairplanes]

Besides, all right-thinking nukes know that EM is the best rate.

Fortunately the rest of us know that's just the Carbon deposits working their delusional "magic".

BWT, if they replaced all the MGs with Static Inverters, what do 'Tricians whine about now if not "MG Hell Week"?

[drayer54]

This has got to be some of the worst advice ever given on NW.   Show me the statistics that back up this claim.  I can give you examples of guys in all rates that made Chief early and/or were selected for LDO.   Job performance is the biggest factor in advancement.

Besides, all right-thinking nukes know that EM is the best rate.

This made me reflect on all the days that I would have had off if I were an EM. I could have gained several days of my life that I spent doing work. We had a chief that always asked the same question to Electricians on boards: you are standing by XXX in 2 plant and realize that it's 11am and the rest of your division is gone, what's the fastest way off the ship?
Now I realize that it was quite possibly the most applicable and relevant board an electrician could receive.
All right thinking nukes who want to go home and play a whole lot of video games underway know the best rate.
Submarines may vary.... (Our ELT's/ET's seemed to work alot so

[Cycoticpenguin]

You make rank off your evals and test scores, and that "magical" "need of the navy"... Ive seen "@#$% hot" chiefs and master chiefs (for example, my favorite chief of all time was an EMCM, made master chief in less then 12 years. My a school chief, a mechanic, made it in less then six). Ive seen all rates with varied "rate of ranks", and it really boils down to those three simple facts...  I asked my Aschool chief how he made rank so fast, and he responded with a simple, yet poignant statement "Do your job".

Gamecock -> Our ELT's were full time ELT's and could barely support their own manning, much less "be a mechanic". Last time I checked, ELT was still an NEC dude...

[DDMurray]

Advancement Stats (% of eligible selected) from E-7 board the last two years (1st listed is sub, 2nd surface)

2010:
EM:  21.4/18.69
ET:  33.6/36.07
MM:  15.44/13.28

2009:
EM:  17.96/17.05
ET:  36.07/11.83
MM:  13.28/13.6

Sub ET was the way to go.  These stats do have a tendency to cycle and more MMs (by raw number) make CPO, but they have a larger pool to select from.
     

[JustinHEMI05]

You make rank off your evals and test scores, and that "magical" "need of the navy"... Ive seen "@#$% hot" chiefs and master chiefs (for example, my favorite chief of all time was an EMCM, made master chief in less then 12 years. My a school chief, a mechanic, made it in less then six). Ive seen all rates with varied "rate of ranks", and it really boils down to those three simple facts...  I asked my Aschool chief how he made rank so fast, and he responded with a simple, yet poignant statement "Do your job".

Gamecock -> Our ELT's were full time ELT's and could barely support their own manning, much less "be a mechanic". Last time I checked, ELT was still an NEC dude...

He was speaking of submarines, where ELTs are (should be) still mechanics. ELTs are still Machinists Mates, whether you like it or not.

Justin

[Cycoticpenguin]

He was speaking of submarines, where ELTs are (should be) still mechanics. ELTs are still Machinists Mates, whether you like it or not.

Justin

I never had a problem with calling them mechanics... they were the ones always fighting against it

[JustinHEMI05]

I never had a problem with calling them mechanics... they were the ones always fighting against it

That is because surface ELTs are worthless.

Justin

[Cycoticpenguin]

That is because surface ELTs are worthless.

Justin

ok.

[hamsamich]

Maybe in the rest of the navy working hard was the way to make upper rate.  Not on my boat or submarine tender.  I have met a couple of good chiefs, but I am being very honest here, most of the people in khakis I worked for except for 3 chiefs, 1 captain, and many good JOs who eventually got out were terrible.  Not just dheads, that too, but just terrible leaders with their heads so far up the rest of the chain of command's a$$ it was laughable, and sad.  Yes this was my opinion and the opinion of almost every other blueshirt on the vessels, but they were so bad it was eerie.  A buddy of mine, who was a great ET (I was an ELT and not a very good mechanic), ended up working for an admiral on the tender while he was convalescing for bone cancer.  The admiral told him frankly, this organization is going downhill, get out now even though you only have 10 years until retirement.  The only time I saw a large proportion of people that desered the rank they wore was when I met a few of the crew of the NR1 when I was in drydock with them.  Those guys were worthy.  Maybe I just got the wrong commands.....

[Cycoticpenguin]

Maybe in the rest of the navy working hard was the way to make upper rate.  Not on my boat or submarine tender.  I have met a couple of good chiefs, but I am being very honest here, most of the people in khakis I worked for except for 3 chiefs, 1 captain, and many good JOs who eventually got out were terrible.  Not just dheads, that too, but just terrible leaders with their heads so far up the rest of the chain of command's a$$ it was laughable, and sad.  Yes this was my opinion and the opinion of almost every other blueshirt on the vessels, but they were so bad it was eerie.  A buddy of mine, who was a great ET (I was an ELT and not a very good mechanic), ended up working for an admiral on the tender while he was convalescing for bone cancer.  The admiral told him frankly, this organization is going downhill, get out now even though you only have 10 years until retirement.  The only time I saw a large proportion of people that desered the rank they wore was when I met a few of the crew of the NR1 when I was in drydock with them.  Those guys were worthy.  Maybe I just got the wrong commands.....

stay in long enough, and rank comes... I was implying making it "fast".

[drayer54]

stay in long enough, and rank comes... I was implying making it "fast".

Some good quotes on the subject:
"Rank is what you wear, Respect is what you earn" and "It pays to know your job, but in the Navy, if you don't, it pays the same"
These pretty well explain samiches situation.

I think that everyone feels the direction is going down when they leave or move up. I think that is natural. The guys leaving when I arrived said it and I said it when I left.
I think that saying is normal. Unless of course we are on a downward spiral ...

Rank in all kinds is earned by time in or working hard to get it quicker.
I wish the Navy would accept that some people can be good at their job, but not be a good leader. I have worked for some people who were technically there and very gifted, just not leaders or good with people. Some people get forced into positions that are just not a good fit for them. I've met a few wearing Khaki that I think should keep the pay but put a blue shirt back on and do what they were actually good at. (Just my opinion)

[Cycoticpenguin]

Some good quotes on the subject:
"Rank is what you wear, Respect is what you earn" and "It pays to know your job, but in the Navy, if you don't, it pays the same"
These pretty well explain samiches situation.

I think that everyone feels the direction is going down when they leave or move up. I think that is natural. The guys leaving when I arrived said it and I said it when I left.
I think that saying is normal. Unless of course we are on a downward spiral ...

Rank in all kinds is earned by time in or working hard to get it quicker.
I wish the Navy would accept that some people can be good at their job, but not be a good leader. I have worked for some people who were technically there and very gifted, just not leaders or good with people. Some people get forced into positions that are just not a good fit for them. I've met a few wearing Khaki that I think should keep the pay but put a blue shirt back on and do what they were actually good at. (Just my opinion)

Brace for" what it means to be a chief" discussion....


I agree with you in regards to sammiches, and mr jones is a prime example of an idiot making rank fast, but it still boils down to those principals for the majority of people.

[hamsamich]

my ET buddy wasn't on his way out, he assumed the admiral would give him advice to stay in, but no.  but he did decide to take his advice. for him, it ended up being an excellent move.

[Zog]

I just want to say, an ELT was the only person I ever saw insert a glass stirring rod int an unmentionable (and potentially very painful) place.  Therefore, if they are the best of the Navy Nukes...what the hell does that say about the rest of us?

I walked in on an ELT doing that same thing and using an inspection mirror in ERF. Wonder if it was the same guy?

[playswithairplanes]

Maybe in the rest of the navy working hard was the way to make upper rate.  Not on my boat or submarine tender.  I have met a couple of good chiefs, but I am being very honest here, most of the people in khakis I worked for except for 3 chiefs, 1 captain, and many good JOs who eventually got out were terrible.  Not just dheads, that too, but just terrible leaders with their heads so far up the rest of the chain of command's a$$ it was laughable, and sad.  Yes this was my opinion and the opinion of almost every other blueshirt on the vessels, but they were so bad it was eerie.  A buddy of mine, who was a great ET (I was an ELT and not a very good mechanic), ended up working for an admiral on the tender while he was convalescing for bone cancer.  The admiral told him frankly, this organization is going downhill, get out now even though you only have 10 years until retirement.  The only time I saw a large proportion of people that desered the rank they wore was when I met a few of the crew of the NR1 when I was in drydock with them.  Those guys were worthy.  Maybe I just got the wrong commands.....

I would say my experience mirrored yours. Of the 3 boats, and two tenders I was on only 2 COs out of the lot that I would work for again. The rest I wouldn't go out of my way to piss on if they were on fire. As for Chiefs, there were maybe 2 or 3 worthwhile, the rest were just garbage. Leadership is more than just having fancy jewelry on your collar, sadly not many understand that. The Navy has a strange way of putting people with no common sense in charge. It's not just now either. Early in WW2 the submarine force had the same problem. I would hope it wouldn't take a war of the same caliber to make the changes... but it probably will.

[DDMurray]

I'm not interested in CPO bashing discussions.  I will say two things:

1. Leadership problems exist everywhere, including civilian nuclear power.
2.  I noticed that two of the posters who brought up poor Chiefs served on tenders.  It was my experience in the navy that 2 types of people went to tender duty:  (A) Those who wanted to be in a geographical area, or (B) They couldn't make it through instructor screening and they wanted off their boat. 

If your manning is from the lower performing population of the navy, then it seems natural that CPOs there would be on the lower end of the great leadership scale.  I sincerely do not mean this as a slight because I believe that everyone serves a critical role in the nuclear navy, and those most nukes call poor performers are still a cut above the rest of the navy.

Flame away.

[drayer54]

I'm not interested in CPO bashing discussions.  I will say two things:
1. Leadership problems exist everywhere, including civilian nuclear power.

I would say my experience mirrored yours. Of the 3 boats, and two tenders I was on only 2 COs out of the lot that I would work for again. The rest I wouldn't go out of my way to piss on if they were on fire. As for Chiefs, there were maybe 2 or 3 worthwhile, the rest were just garbage. Leadership is more than just having fancy jewelry on your collar, sadly not many understand that.

There good officers and bad officers. There are good chiefs and there are bad chiefs. There are good LPO's and there are bad LPO's. We have good branch heads and bad branch heads. We have have leaders and we have pseudo leaders. This happens on every level in and outside of the community. Opinions do vary and some styles work differently for different people.

We learn from the good and we learn from the bad. I think we all shape our own vision and approach to this based on our experience. I am sure that everyone on here can name a great leader they have worked for and then name one that is laughable. I think it is wise to be hesitant in criticising leadership before really understanding that persons viewpoint and responsibilities. Sometimes even after that analysis we are still critical and that is OK.  I would not isolate bad leadership to a certain mess, wardroom, or office branch.I think Murray trying to throw the bad chiefs all to non training positions or imply that they are any less worthy by having orders there is also ridiculous and far off base. I also think it is funny that when people describe RO's/Cheng's, they usually describe them as either terrible or awesome. Very rare that I hear of a Ehh one or a reasonably ok one. Usually one way or the other.

Also, if everyone wants to come on here and name off the bad people they have worked for, this thread will get mighty long and pointless.

[namlive]

From what I gather from this thread:  ELT's are not God. They are simply qualified to stand the watch. ( Except one guy fascinated with a glass rod. )

[Cycoticpenguin]

From what I gather from this thread:  ELT's are not God. They are simply qualified to stand the watch. ( Except one guy fascinated with a glass rod. )

strangely familiar to every other rate in the navy...

[drayer54]

From what I gather from this thread:  ELT's are not God. They are simply qualified to stand the watch. ( Except one guy fascinated with a glass rod. )

Every rate on every ship seems to have a "that guy with the glass rod" 

[DDMurray]

I think Murray trying to throw the bad chiefs all to non training positions or imply that they are any less worthy by having orders there is also ridiculous and far off base.

Do you work for Fox News or MSNBC?  My remark was that if you did tender duty you were more likely to encounter what most would consider below average leaders.  I tried to expound on that and say they were not less worthy.  I believe there are reasons instructors have a better chance of success when they go back to sea:

1.  They work with a lot of hot-runners.
2.  They are required to keep their plant and/or theoretical knowledge at a higher level than someone who goes to TRF/Tender/Recruiting/NRMD, so they have a better chance of succeeding when they go back to sea because they are not having to re-learn basic nuke stuff.

Does this mean that all instructors are great?  No
Does this mean that all non-instructors are below average? Of course not.

[drayer54]

Do you work for Fox News or MSNBC?  My remark was that if you did tender duty you were more likely to encounter what most would consider below average leaders.  I tried to expound on that and say they were not less worthy.  I believe there are reasons instructors have a better chance of success when they go back to sea:
1.  They work with a lot of hot-runners.
2.  They are required to keep their plant and/or theoretical knowledge at a higher level than someone who goes to TRF/Tender/Recruiting/NRMD, so they have a better chance of succeeding when they go back to sea because they are not having to re-learn basic nuke stuff.
Does this mean that all instructors are great?  No
Does this mean that all non-instructors are below average? Of course not

Let's keep this as accurate as any other no spin zone .  The point of my comment and I think it is even applicable as a response to your reply is that you are going to have the good and the bad everywhere. I wouldn't discount the abilities of any sailor who goes there because of the command, and I don't think you are. The other commands do offer unique experiences and some of those are very valuable to take back to the ship. I do remember recruiters taking forever to requalify, but after the first few months on board it does come back and everyone is usually back to being competent in the plants again (assuming they were the first time around)...


The part of the comment that made me "Flame away" was that you said the reason he may have had bad leadership is because he was on a tender. I think it is hard to generalize bad leadership to a certain command type when it is going to occur everywhere.
Full Disclosure) I have never even seen a tender and have minimal knowledge of them. I would also choose to work at Fox because of the ample amount of hot airheads .

[hamsamich]

I wasn't chief bashing by the way, just saying the PATH to leadership in the Navy seemed to involve alot of butt-kissing and boot licking and good-old-boy type stuff.   Could you make it on hard work too, yep.  But that didn't seem to be the norm from what I saw.  Plus with alot of the cream getting out to make more money elsewhere, there wasn't as big a pile too choose from, obviously.

[darkmatter]

I was an ELT of the 74-04 class----which explains why ELTs are considered somewhat wacked-out nut jobs depending on who you asked----- I saw instructors who pipetted reactor coolant by mouth. The first counter-scaler I used was a binary one with rows of lights you had to count the numbered lights (2,4,8,16,etc.)to get your count rate. I learned my physics on a slide-rule in B.C. (Before Computers). When I got out of the Nuke Navy Subs. where as an ELT we did what the commercial plants used five crafts for. Ops, Mech, I&C, Chem, and Janitor. I did just one fifth the work in the Navy for five times the pay. I had a WoooooHoooo moment and never looked back. So the answer to the original question is still----depends on who you ask.

[Cycoticpenguin]

I wasn't chief bashing by the way, just saying the PATH to leadership in the Navy seemed to involve alot of butt-kissing and boot licking and good-old-boy type stuff.   Could you make it on hard work too, yep.  But that didn't seem to be the norm from what I saw.  Plus with alot of the cream getting out to make more money elsewhere, there wasn't as big a pile too choose from, obviously.

Umm, welcome to the planet earth? You will hard pressed to make it anywhere, military or not, with out sufficient tact (some call it brown nosing, but theres a distinct difference here. No one likes an !$#-kisser...), hard work, and that "good ole boy" type stuff usually involves nepotism or separating your self through hard work. You can be given anything in this world, what you do with it ......

[Smooth Operator]

Anyone "stuck" in ERF for six years was failed by his LPO, his LCPO, his EDMC, his DH, his command, and the NNPP,...

Well when you have a lazy/selfish LELT (doesn't want to do the extra check chem or risk an ORSE comment) who convinces the CO that you can't trust seconday chemists (MMs qualified SG chemistry)....you pretty much sequester ELTs in ERF.

If you are min staffing on ELTs, you don't get much time away from ERF.

[JustinHEMI05]

Yup, under my watch as LELT on my boat, ELTs moved out and stood ERUL and ERS as well. We saw ourselves as part of Mdiv.

Justin

[Marlin]

Yup, under my watch as LELT on my boat, ELTs moved out and stood ERUL and ERS as well. We saw ourselves as part of Mdiv.

Justin

   The same on my boats, in port and in the yards the duty ELT and one other usually the LELT did Chem/RadCon the rest of the ELTs worked in M-Div for the day and on the primary plant if needed so we could do our own RadCon coverage.
   Sub and surface Nuke culture was worlds apart.

[hamsamich]

I agree charlie murphy, no need to be condescending.  I was countering a different post.  Stuff is obvious to me also.  Exsists everywhere, not just the navy.

[SubSailor99]

(I am only speaking about my experience on Submarines)

The argument about being an ELT is the best rate could go on forever, but it boils down to the individual’s experience.  On submarines, when I was in a year ago, that experience was determined by the M-div chief’s views.  On my first boat the M-div Chief saw RL division as a separate division and allowed the LELT to run it.  We would do all our required work and then would go do mechanic work if there was time.  Life was sweet or as sweet it can get working on a sub.  On my second boat the M-div Chief didn't even see ELT he just saw 5 additional mechanics.  So the LELT would send an ELT to go do something like the chemical inventory and the chief would find him and send him to go do some M-div maintenance instead.  The end result would be that you would spend all day doing M-div work and when M-div got to leave, you got to stay late to do your work.  It made life pretty miserable. 

I hear life on board surface ships is pretty sweet no matter what rate you’re in.  Fresh milk, fresh air, all the soda you can drink, and 10+ section duty, pretty sweet deal

[JustinHEMI05]

Don't forget McDonald's on board.

[Smooth Operator]

I suspect we are saying the same thing,...

We are, just adding a why stream to how and ELT can find himself stuck in ERF.

[drayer54]

(I am only speaking about my experience on Submarines)
I hear life on board surface ships is pretty sweet no matter what rate you’re in.  Fresh milk, fresh air, all the soda you can drink, and 10+ section duty, pretty sweet deal

Hahaha someone lied to you. I did a deployment last year with no ice, terrible milk and rarely filled soda machines.
The fresh air part is true though. There is nothing more refreshing than inhaling some fresh jet exhaust when it is the only thing you are getting in your ventillation and making everyones eyes water..... It's better than coffee Don't sub plants have a/c?
10+ section duty is true if you work in the air wing. Most nukes however are not working the air wing . My last few years on the ship varied from 4 section liberty to 3/4 section duty. We saw 6 section in 2006, but that was a dream fantasy for the rest of my time onboard.
It's most definetely a pretty sweet deal. I better stop, I'm getting homesick....

Don't forget McDonald's on board.

My carrier had a starbucks in the aft mess decks too, the forward mess decks had the mcdonalds with the play area for the air wing and topsiders who had nothing better to do...

[Cycoticpenguin]

Hahaha someone lied to you. I did a deployment last year with no ice, terrible milk and rarely filled soda machines.
The fresh air part is true though. There is nothing more refreshing than inhaling some fresh jet exhaust when it is the only thing you are getting in your ventillation and making everyones eyes water..... It's better than coffee Don't sub plants have a/c?
10+ section duty is true if you work in the air wing. Most nukes however are not working the air wing . My last few years on the ship varied from 4 section liberty to 3/4 section duty. We saw 6 section in 2006, but that was a dream fantasy for the rest of my time onboard.
It's most definetely a pretty sweet deal. I better stop, I'm getting homesick....

My carrier had a starbucks in the aft mess decks too, the forward mess decks had the mcdonalds with the play area for the air wing and topsiders who had nothing better to do...

you forgot the swimming pool. We were 3 section the majority of the time anyway. No clue where the 10 section duty thing comes in from O.o  we had a good deal, we had a fully stocked ships store most of the time, and at least marginally edible food on most nights. Quality of life on a carrier wasnt THAT bad, speaking simply from the availability of things we took for granted (internet, stores, gyms, cold berthings, getting mail whenever the cod was available, id never compare what we went through to a submariner.)

[JustinHEMI05]

Don't forget McDonalds!

[drayer54]

Don't forget McDonalds!

I didn't! It was one of the cool McDonald's with the play areas too.... (for the air wing, think line control on a no fly day)

[JustinHEMI05]

LMAO

[SubSailor99]

Don't sub plants have a/c?

We do, but thats mostly to keep the electronics cool (and dry) and to keep the ERUL stay time over 6 hours so you can actually stand a full watch.  Although it gets pretty nice in bearthing too  provided your not stuck in a rack with the air blowing straight on you.

[playswithairplanes]

I'm not interested in CPO bashing discussions.  I will say two things:

1. Leadership problems exist everywhere, including civilian nuclear power.
2.  I noticed that two of the posters who brought up poor Chiefs served on tenders.  It was my experience in the navy that 2 types of people went to tender duty:  (A) Those who wanted to be in a geographical area, or (B) They couldn't make it through instructor screening and they wanted off their boat. 

On point 1, no doubt. That isn't just limited to nuclear power. Where I work we have had and still do have some pretty massive leadership problems which play out on the world stage for all to see. Our failures are writ large and cost 10s of Billions of dollars. Recovery is slow and agonizing, except for those responsible, who oddly enough haven't lost their jobs. Nepotism is a BIIIG problem. I'll leave it at that.

On point 2, I was for sure in the A category. I wanted to go to Europe, going to the tender was the only way it was going to happen from the West Coast. I wouldn't say that we had poor quality nukes. Sure some were, but not all the Chiefs were. One of the "good" Chiefs and one of the Good officers that I would work for again any time any where were on those Tenders. In fact the absolute WORST CO I ever had was on my last boat. He's certainly in the wouldn't go out of my way to piss on even if he were on fire category... but I might throw a can of gas on him. Just horrible. Was a ladder climber, and let it be known. His style was "the beatings will continue until morale improves". Literally threatened the Bull Nuke with "bad things" if we didn't do Outstanding on ORSE. I couldn't wait to get out of there. 

[metalman40]

Back in the old days one didn't need to be in the top 50% of his nuke school class to be a chief just good in rate knowledge and good evals. However you couldn't be an instructor without it.

Tender duty had it's advantages in pay and sea time clock.

I had good CPO's and officers in R-5.

[spekkio]

I wasn't chief bashing by the way, just saying the PATH to leadership in the Navy seemed to involve alot of butt-kissing and boot licking and good-old-boy type stuff.   Could you make it on hard work too, yep.  But that didn't seem to be the norm from what I saw.  Plus with alot of the cream getting out to make more money elsewhere, there wasn't as big a pile too choose from, obviously.

This is not unique to the Navy.

I worked in private businesses for 3 years prior to joining the Navy. The truest advice anyone ever gave me was an ex gf's uncle who was a millionaire lawyer with his own firm. You'd think this guy went to Harvard, but nope...state school all the way.

His advice went something like this: "You can work hard your entire life, get good grades, etc., but if that's all you do at the end of the day you'll only be a worker bee. I make more money than Harvard guys clamoring for jobs at corporate law firms because I found a good partner and we have good business sense..."

Another successful businessman commented this about layoffs: "If you're in your 40's and you still remain expendable to your organization, then you failed at life."

The point is, hard work by itself isn't enough to get ahead in this world. You can work your ass off for 80 hours a week flipping burgers at McDonald's, but at the end of all that you'll still be a 'cook' making $10/hour. If you think that the Navy promotes just based off of a "good old boys" system, wait until you try to compete for a corporate management position. Building good working relationships with people, whether it's your boss, a client, or people you supervise is a cornerstone to a successful career in almost every field. There's nothing you can do about this to change it...you either recognize it and succeed, or enjoy your self-imposed glass ceiling.

Usually the people who complain about "the system" and how their hard work goes unrecognized are sub-par performers anyway, and don't work nearly as hard as they claim they do.

[JustinHEMI05]

Another successful businessman commented this about layoffs: "If you're in your 40's and you still remain expendable to your organization, then you failed at life."

Oh I could so parlay this into a poly sci debate about unions and job stagnation, but I will resist.

Nice post, I really liked it.

Justin

[OldHP]

Another successful businessman commented this about layoffs: "If you're in your 40's and you still remain expendable to your organization, then you failed at life."

And if you think, no matter what age, you are un-expendadable, (no matter what your position) - Think Again!  Everyone can be replaced!!   

Sometimes it is hard, sometimes it is easy!  My philosophy was always, and still is, if you don't train someone else as your replacement, you can't move to the next rung.

[hamsamich]

"Plus with alot of the cream getting out to make more money elsewhere, there wasn't as big a pile too choose from, obviously."

You would have a hard time convincing me this part isn't unique in the navy.  Many people look at the Navy as a starting/jumping off point.  I did.

The other part was just part of a response to another post that said the navy was all about hard work, and just like every other organization, just not true.  Not understanding how my post says I was making a point that was unique in the Navy.  Gotta read the rest of the earlier posts unless I missed something.

[spekkio]

People decide to leave the military for all sorts of reasons. Not everyone does it because they think they're better than the military or because they just want to make more money, and not everyone joins the Navy just for college money or a jumping off point. I guarantee that if you were to ask everyone who leaves this year "where are you today" 5 years later, you'd find quite a diverse range of employment and salaries.

If you work long enough in any job, you'll come across a boss who will make you say "how the hell did this guy get hired for his job?!?" You'll also come across plenty of people who skate by doing the minimum required to avoid getting fired. If you find that to be your experience with all of your bosses and how they get promoted, the problem might be you.

[modex]

@OP: Talk to ELTs who are in now.

You can qualify secondary chemists if you want but the regulations are clear as to the circumstances under which you can qualify them. Those with the confidential books can look it up when you are bored. Also if your squadron CRA doesn't like it, he might tell your ENG it's a bad idea, and thus ship's policy is made.

LOL at the collateral duty comment. I guess that's why there is a unique primary NEC. Many boats now have Chief LELT's and you best believe those ELT's are not owned by M-Div.

[Already Gone]

His advice went something like this: "You can work hard your entire life, get good grades, etc., but if that's all you do at the end of the day you'll only be a worker bee. I make more money than Harvard guys clamoring for jobs at corporate law firms because I found a good partner and we have good business sense..."

Another successful businessman commented this about layoffs: "If you're in your 40's and you still remain expendable to your organization, then you failed at life."

Ahem.  Hmmmmhmhm.  (Just clearing my throat so you can hear me loud and clear.)  BULL$H!T!!!

Making more money is not an indicator of a successful life.  Saving money will get you rich faster than making it more times than not.  A hard worker who is good at saving will retire.  A lazy spendthrift with a six figure salary can die in poverty.

Second, If you are not expendable to your organization you are just blowing smoke up your own a$$.  I am 49 years old.  I have had at least ten jobs in my life, maybe more.  I have never quit a job.  What does that say?  Sure, I might make a little bit of money, but that can go as quickly as it came.

There is only one organization to which I am not expendable.  The members of that organization call me "Daddy".  Get that figured out and you have certainly not failed at life.

Love what you do, and you will have a successful career also.  Bobby Flay flips burgers for a living.  The difference?  Passion for life.  Care deeply about something other than yourself.  It's as simple as that.

[Gamecock]

LOL at the collateral duty comment. I guess that's why there is a unique primary NEC. Many boats now have Chief LELT's and you best believe those ELT's are not owned by M-Div.

And his guys will end up being the 19 year E-6 wanking about why he can't make chief.

[spekkio]

Making more money is not an indicator of a successful life.  Saving money will get you rich faster than making it more times than not.  A hard worker who is good at saving will retire.  A lazy spendthrift with a six figure salary can die in poverty.

It depends on what you want out of life, but in general, earning potential is largely associated with success. There are exceptions -- is a man who sacrifices his home life to make $200k more successful than someone who makes $80k but spends a lot of time with his children?

However, I disagree that saving is the panacea for getting rich. Saving liquid assets will actually cost you money in the long run. The average savings account today is in the 2% apy realm. That was barely enough to beat inflation last year and is losing to inflation this year. And if you're planning to live off of a 2% Return on Investment (ROI), you'd need enough money where you wouldn't need the interest for substinance, anyway. To actually make money -- enough to make you 'rich' at least -- you have to invest it into something that can make money for you and will continue to do it after you retire. That usually requires a lot of work on the front end, since your profit margin won't be high enough to hire people to do all that management work. Yes, there are various IRA plans and 401k plans, but the higher ROI's are riskier and not always guaranteed, while the lower, sure thing ROI's are still in the 1-3% realm. The rub is that unlike an asset that you create, you have absolutely no control over how the riskier investments behave. You just play craps with your retirement money and hope that you come out richer at the back end.

Second, If you are not expendable to your organization you are just blowing smoke up your own a$$.  I am 49 years old.  I have had at least ten jobs in my life, maybe more.  I have never quit a job.  What does that say?  Sure, I might make a little bit of money, but that can go as quickly as it came.

There is only one organization to which I am not expendable.  The members of that organization call me "Daddy".  Get that figured out and you have certainly not failed at life.

The man who said this had his own law firm, an asset that could either continue to make him money after he retired or could be sold for enough money to allow him to live his retired years in comfort. Also, as the principle investor of capital, overall manager, and someone who had built a relationship with various clients, he wasn't exactly expendable to it.

His point was not to settle for being a 9-5'er who collects a paycheck and goes home. If you work your way to an exec position who can claim that he is directly reponsibile for a high profit margin, then your job is relatively safe. If you're not producing, your job is on the chopping block. No one grows up saying that they want to work in a cubicle for 40 hours a week typing away on a computer and making phone calls, but somehow the majority of Americans end up there.

Love what you do, and you will have a successful career also.  Bobby Flay flips burgers for a living.  The difference?  Passion for life.  Care deeply about something other than yourself.  It's as simple as that.

Agree there

If you're in your 40's and your organization is not expendable for you, you need to get hot with your life planning,...

Touche!

[spekkio]

@OP: Talk to ELTs who are in now.

You can qualify secondary chemists if you want but the regulations are clear as to the circumstances under which you can qualify them. Those with the confidential books can look it up when you are bored. Also if your squadron CRA doesn't like it, he might tell your ENG it's a bad idea, and thus ship's policy is made.

LOL at the collateral duty comment. I guess that's why there is a unique primary NEC. Many boats now have Chief LELT's and you best believe those ELT's are not owned by M-Div.

Gamecock is 100% correct.

The natural career progression for a newly minted MMC (nuke ELT type) in the submarine force is to become the MLCPO. The only unique billets for a MMC ELT's are for shore duty jobs like SQELT or jobs at NRMD.

If you don't have something on your evals that demonstrates that you can handle the job of MLCPO, they most likely won't make you a nuke MMC. It's also worth noting that refusing to venture outside the realm of ERF watch, chemistry samples, and slapping a probe on pipes is going to make it difficult to qual EWS, a pre-req for CPO in the nuke Navy.

In my admittedly short career on subs, the only MMC (ELT type) of RL division we had was a washout MLCPO who was 6 months from retirement. He was fired from MLCPO after a huge incident of blasing a retest for a major maintenance item. Once he retired, we didn't get a replacement MMC for RL division. According to my ENG and guys on other boats, it's not a normal billet for a submarine to have an RLLCPO, and the MLCPO is responsible for midterm counseling and evals for RL division.

[Already Gone]

spekkio, you are young, and it is admirable that you understand the mechanics of investing.  Also admirable is your ambition to make an important place for yourself in your business endeavors.

But please realize a few things.

One, the headlines are full every day of "successful", rich lawyers who are: going to jail, in jail, found with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head (sometimes with a house full of dead children and a spouse as well).
They all have their own law firms too.  Bernie Madoff was the picture of economic success in this country.
So was Ken Lay.
Donald Trump lives a pretty opulent lifestyle, but Warren buffet could buy Trump's entire holdings with the change in his sofa.  He drives a Ford and buys his suits off the rack.
Which of these is more successful?  Is either? Or, is it a tie?  Who can say?

Two, I wasn't talking about saving your pennies in a passbook account.  When I said "saving" I meant not spending your money an a lot of useless crap that won't comfort you in your old age.

Three, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a 9 to 5er who collects his check and goes home and never moves into an executive position.  If it gets you what you need and asks no more than you are willing to give in return, it's a pretty good deal.

Four, don't kid yourself into thinking that being productive will save your ass.  Many jobs are taken from productive intelligent people, because "down-sizing" them will save the jobs of their lazy, short-sighted, greedy bosses.  Being a moneymaker for your employer will not always keep you safe.  Being an un-productive drag on their profit margin won't necessarily endanger you either.  This is the real world we're talking about.

You ARE NOT what YOU DO.
You ARE NOT what YOU OWN.
You ARE NOT what OTHERS THINK of you.

You ARE what YOU LOVE in this world. 
Money and employment are simply a means to attaining and sustaining your true passions.

If you are a Cubs fan, be a great Cubs fan.
If you are a father and husband, be great at that.
If you just get off on selling real estate, or used cars, or mutual funds, then do it with all you have.  But the guy next to you is not less of a success simply because his priorities are elsewhere.

It is the rare individual who finds a job that fills his life with joy.  You don't know whether to envy them or pity them.  In a way, they are the luckiest, because they enjoy their jobs.  It makes you wonder though if they have any other joy in their lives.

I guess it is all about balance.  If you know your priorities (which isn't all that common, sadly) and you keep your life arranged in that order, you'll be a success.

[spekkio]

spekkio, you are young, and it is admirable that you understand the mechanics of investing.  Also admirable is your ambition to make an important place for yourself in your business endeavors.

Don't have business endeavors -- not yet, anyway -- still in the Navy.

One, the headlines are full every day of "successful", rich lawyers who are: going to jail, in jail, found with a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head (sometimes with a house full of dead children and a spouse as well).
They all have their own law firms too.

Irrelevant. There are plenty of suicidal and deranged poor people, too. The possession of money does not cause you to be these things, so I'm not sure where you're going with this other than to falsely imply there's some kind of correlation between wealth and social derangement.

News of a poor person killing someone just doesn't sell as well as a celebrity killing someone, so naturally the headlines (at least the one you'll notice) are going to be skewed toward the latter.

Two, I wasn't talking about saving your pennies in a passbook account.  When I said "saving" I meant not spending your money an a lot of useless crap that won't comfort you in your old age.

That's a vague statement. There are a lot of things you can do with your money when you 'save' it. Most people, when they refer to 'saving', are talking about CD's, savings accounts, 401k's, etc. All of these methods largely equate to 'pennies in passbook account' in the scheme of earning potential. All it really does is allow people, like myself, to put excess money in an account that won't lose value over the next 20-40 years, so when I retire I can supplement my social security/pension/whatever with my savings from my younger years adjusted for inflation.

I'm sorry that I made a wrongful assumption if you were talking about something else, but at least do me the favor of defining what you're actually talking about.

Three, there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a 9 to 5er who collects his check and goes home and never moves into an executive position.  If it gets you what you need and asks no more than you are willing to give in return, it's a pretty good deal.

I didn't say there was something wrong with it. I said it makes you more expendable. There are a bigger supply of workers who can do your job effectively.

Four, don't kid yourself into thinking that being productive will save your ass.  Many jobs are taken from productive intelligent people, because "down-sizing" them will save the jobs of their lazy, short-sighted, greedy bosses.  Being a moneymaker for your employer will not always keep you safe.  Being an un-productive drag on their profit margin won't necessarily endanger you either.  This is the real world we're talking about.

I said nothing about productive and intelligent people, I said people who seriously contribute to the profit margin of the company. The janitor at a large company is both productive and might be very intelligent, but laying him off and replacing him with a less experienced janitor at 75% pay is going to increase the profit margin. The VP who has doubled earnings since taking the job, on the other hand, is a bit less expendable. He might have a bigger salary, but laying him off and hiring someone on the cheap could seriously dent the bottom-line.

[Llama]

And if you think, no matter what age, you are un-expendadable, (no matter what your position) - Think Again!  Everyone can be replaced!!  

Sometimes it is hard, sometimes it is easy!  My philosophy was always, and still is, if you don't train someone else as your replacement, you can't move to the next rung.

Hopefully not to get too far off topic. A caveat to the first part is to find a niche in the indusrty where there is no substitute for experience. While this doesn't guarantee that you are expendable it does limit the selection process by which your employer can replace you. It would be difficult to replace someone who the Regulators trust and call by name.  

Very sound advice on the second part. You may become too indispensable in your current position insofar as your employer would find it to their advantage not to advance you and lose your skillset.

[Cycoticpenguin]

sounds like you gentlemen need a gold member account so you can discuss this further in the poly sci section

[Higgs]

What does panacea mean?

And if someone says google it, I am smiting them.

Justin

[spekkio]

I dunno, what DOES panacea mean? 

[Higgs]

Thanks. You smart people and your fancy words.... 

[Already Gone]

Maybe a moderator can split this topic into a new one.

Spekkio,
I am not going to quibble with you over the meanings of words and the definition of success.  For no one person can define success for another.  Your lawyer friend may seem successful to you, but a disappointment to himself.  Who can say?

I'll leave you with the advice of a much wiser man.

 9 Live joyfully with the wife whom you love all the days of your vain life which He has given you under the sun, all your days of vanity; for that is your portion in life, and in the labor which you perform under the sun.

 10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work or device or knowledge or wisdom in the grave where you are going.

 11 I returned and saw under the sun that—

      The race is not to the swift,
      Nor the battle to the strong,
      Nor bread to the wise,
      Nor riches to men of understanding,
      Nor favor to men of skill;
      But time and chance happen to them all.
       12 For man also does not know his time:
      Like fish taken in a cruel net,
      Like birds caught in a snare,
      So the sons of men are snared in an evil time,
      When it falls suddenly upon them.

[MacGyver]

No need to split now that the thread is compliant with BZNWGenOp01;
To wit;

ELT's are known to be as wise as Solomon, powerful as Chuck Norris and as charming as Matthew McConaughey, or some combination of all three,....

All of which answers the OP;

And there you have it,....back on-topic,....

still keep forgetting,....

Just keep'in it real ... 
 





Hehehehehehehehe ...

[730SMAG]

ELT's are known to be as wise as Solomon, powerful as Chuck Norris and as charming as Matthew McConaughey, or some combination of all three,....

At least that's what we document.   

[Fermi2]

LOL I just got it!

[Cycoticpenguin]

LOL I just got it!

haha and here I am thinking youre some kind of super intelligent person... sheesh mike, what are you doin us...

[fiveeleven]

Finally ! After a somewhat lengthy mean free path through a labyrinthine quagmire of seemingly off-topic banter, the legend and mystique lives on. You have your mates - electrician and machinist, your technicians - electronic, instrumentation/control and last but impossibly least, engineering laboratory. Never in the history of Propulsion, Navy Nuclear, 1 each; not since the third entity of the nuclear tri-une swilled his first shot of coolant, has there been a more storied group of swabbies as they who in a single bound, can leap amidships over the Prise. May the legend live on. MM2/ELT USS NIMITZ CVN-68 80-84.  BOHICA