Should time in grade, service be scrapped?


As we reported last week, the Air Force is mulling over its current practice of awarding promotion points based on how long airmen have been in the service and in their current rank, and whether it should continue to do so. Air Force Times would like to hear from you on this issue. Should time in grade and time in service be scrapped, saved, or reduced in importance? Why do you think so?

E-mail Jeff Schogol to share your thoughts. If you’d like your comments to remain anonymous, that’s fine.


About Author


  1. Between two candidates with identical scores everywhere else, most employers would chose the candidate that has more general experience in the work force and/or had more time behind the wheel at their current rank. The points should remain.

  2. I completely agree with getting rid of the TIG/TIS points in WAPS testing! Just because you’ve been doing the job longer doesn’t mean that you’re better equipped to be a leader. I also believe that the promotion list should be ranked according to the individual’s composite score for the same reason.

  3. The AF should keep the current practice of awarding points for TIG and TIS. The AF should keep the TIG and TIS as part of the promotion factor but they can lessen the role it plays on promotion. The AF can use the points scored on PDG and SKT as the bases for who get promoted first. This will not resolve the problem because you’ll promote the book smart individual who possible can’t perform their job nor the duties of a NCO/SNCO. I would like the AF to remove the EPR from the equation. The EPR’s are over inflated and you allowing the human factor to negatively or positively affect someone’s AF career. I say negative/positive becasue everybody has different standards even though we have AFIs that give us the baseline. Also, EPRs allow favortism to grow because a supervisor might like one Amn/NCO over the next because they have similar taste and they hangout together. This happens everyday in the AF and we breed this behavior. I have been in for 20 years and when I came in NCOs and Amn were not allowed to hangout but as the years go by this has changed and it’s the norm now. Bottomline I say keep the TIG/TIS and remove the EPRs from the promtion equations. I would like to say the time you spin in a rank you’re developing yourself for the next level. If we promote the folks who can test well but can’t lead nor work at the level they have been promoted too we’re still hurting the overall enlisted core. Once again remove the EPRs and let your PDG/SKT and the other points except EPRs determine who gets promoted or not. If you reduce the importance EPRs play in a promotion you might actually see the inflation go down. If people are promoted on their smarts like we are doing now to some degree we might have a better enlisted force, i hope.

  4. The TIG/TIS points should stay the same. A lot of today’s “fast burning” Airman only have one person in mind when it comes to development… themselves. They ride the coat tails of the work horse SSgt/TSgt to mission success while they’re out volunteering for EVERYTHING and getting credit for it all. “A”irman should be promoted for how they perform and lead Airman. I’m new to the SNCO core and at a place where we’re 160% manned in the MSgt position. It’s sickening what “we’re” willing to do to each other while vying for position. I became a SNCO to help Airman… not to cut them down.

  5. In my 30 years of experience, the best and brightest have always found ways to get promoted well ahead of Air Force averages; despite the lack of longevity points. Many have been promoted first time out. My concern is that if we lower the longevity bar, how far will that bring our experience level down….who will be hurt the most? Changing longevity screams that our Air Force does NOT value experience….sounds dangerous to me. It seems this latest initiative is ignoring the original problem…how do we make performance reports meaningful. Isn’t performance the best indicator of future success? We have a lot of smart senior leaders, certainly this can solved…can it not? Removing these longevity points will not garner the desired changes, and will most certainly create many new challenges. Go back to the drawing board and resolve this performance report problem, because all we are doing right now is kicking the can down the road.

  6. Points for TIG/TIS should stay. You can’t buy experience, it can only be earned. However, I do believe that the current policy should be modified. I think the points earned for TIG/TIS should still count towards the WAPS score, but after all the scores are tallied the individual line numbers should be racked and stacked based on the total score and not be weighted by someones TIG. It is as if TIG is counted twice in the current equation.

Leave A Reply