KC10 FATboy

Wow this just floors me. Maxed pushups and situps ... and a respectable run time considering your height/age. What the hell are they thinking? They're nuts to go down this road.

Additionally, I would sue them and demand disability because they have officially labeled you has being high risk for "cardiovascular disease, diabetes, certain cancers, and other health problems". (not my words, theirs)

Marvin

Just a thought, but ... before we slay AF leadership over this, maybe we ought to wait and find out if GasNGo actually gets discharged???

And the SUPT guy who was almost finished and was separated for an excessive waistline -- do we know any more facts? Was the guy #1 in his class, or was he barely surviving and this pushed him over the edge?

There's plenty of questionable decisions made in the military, but maybe we ought not to overreact to a decision they might make.

Just sayin' ...

KC10 FATboy

Well, I agree with you but people ARE being let go because of this stupid test. However, it is a regulation now and the commander's hands are tied. There's no more "he's a nice guy, good airmen" concept. Also, without a passing fitness test, you can't deploy. If you are scheduled to deploy, and your fitness test will expire while deployed, you must take and pass it before the deployment. In my unit, we have 2 individuals who are in the final process of force separation -- one for the waist measurement.

dtfl

I would like to think the AF will bring back the measurements and BMI if a person has a >39" waist...but I have my doubts. This is basically a RIF. My father (a DOD employee for >33 years) thinks this is another way to screen folks so the DOD won't have to pay loads of healthcare costs once we retire. Add to that the fact that some med folks I talked to defended the waist measurements in the new PT test by saying large (even proportionate) folks place more strain on their heart - leads me to believe this is a RIF. A RIF with a good idea for keeping folks in shape. If this were truly a PT test and lifestyle change they would have the BMI/measurements for larger folks.

viperdriver

Cant imagine many AFA football players (esp linemen) would be able to have or keep a 39 inch waist for 20 years.

GasNGo

I did some more digging, AFI 36-3206 governs officer separations. It says one could face a general discharge if SecAF wishes it. It goes on to say if you intentionally bombed it a court martial is possible.

What do you guys think a general under honorable conditions would mean for future hiring?

I was told this could lead to separation in my "briefing" with the boss. I'm still at least 6 months from crossing that bridge if the Sq/CC wishes to.

zondaracer

I doubt it would end up as a general under honorable, I sat on a discharge board and we gave a SSgt general under honorable for testing positive for marijuana and I had an Airman in my flight test positive for cocaine and he got General under Honorable Conditions. Besides, a general under honorable can be upgraded to an honorable after a few months. You didn't intentionally bomb the PT test, it is obvious to see.

Deuce130

Most don't have a problem, as most of them aren't offensive lineman. The ones that I knew didn't have much trouble over the years. But then, most of them didn't stick around for 20 either.

rickair7777

Not true. Officers can certainly be given any characterization of discharge which is appropriate, including a Duck Dinner.

Without a court martial, the service secretary can summarily dismiss any reserve officer, or regular officers with less than six years service. After that they can dismiss regular officers only through due process which does not single you out personally (such as continuation boards, PT fail, medical review, etc). And then they have to pay you a lump sum separation pay. They can't just fire you because they don't like you...otherwise Clinton and Pat Schroeder would have dismissed every officer who was within the Las Vegas city limits in SEP 1991.

To get rid of a bad apple you have to CM him. Also you CAN be reduced in rank, but I think that is limited to the highest rank at which you performed satisfactory service. Ie, a COL who get's caught banging his E-3 driver one time would get reduced to LCOL. A COL who had been falsifying travel claims for years might get busted to MAJ if the fraud occurred while he was also a LCOL.

rickair7777

A general discharge would be bad for an officer, espially if yu are airline bound...an HD is the default for us. In the recent past, a GD was common for enlisted who performed adequately but I think nowdays they are giving most enlisted an HD unless they screwed up.

Some employers might not care if they are not military savvy...they might be used to seeing ex-enlisted with GD's and not really be aware of the distinction between officer and enlisted as far as that goes.

But airlines probably know exactly what an officer should graduate with. I suppose it's possible that you could explain away a GD due to PT troubles, but you would be starting at a disadvantage I think.

Try real hard to get an HD. If it comes to that make every effort to pass (I'm sure you are), document everything you do as far as diet and exercise and start lobbying leadership now to make them aware that you REALLY want to stay and are trying REALLY hard.

Since the GD in this case requires SECAF approval, I doubt anybody would go to the trouble to request that unless they really had it out for you. "Service Secretary Approval" is code for "You Better Have a Damn Good Reason for Wanting to Do This". As long as they don't think you slacking intentionally I doubt this would happen. An HD is most likely.