Agreed. But then Gillett would have to be fired and Billy is not going to allow that because he doesn't want to appear hypocritical based on his own affairs, and Carter didn't want to fire Billy because he didn't want to appear hyprocritical based on his own affiars and Crenshaw didn't investigate any of it because, you guessed it, he didn't want to appear hyporcritical based on his own affiars. Melson, you have assembled quite a team!Here is a news flash--how about if you are a sexual predator you can't be an ASAC? Having a substatiated IA jacket should not be career enhancing--but seems to be the norm in ATF. I become more embarrased being an Agent every day!!
ASAC Requirements
#1 Guest_Simple Man_*
Posted 06 November 2010 - 10:18 AM
#2
Posted 05 November 2010 - 01:22 PM
Seems as if there is a memo going around seeking comments about changing the minimum requirements to be an ASAC. Thank god HQ finally realized we need to have management with real operational experience. Sum and substance of the memo lends itself to the premise that unless you have had actual CE group supervisor time you can't be an ASAC. This means that if you came to ATF from another agency, never worked an original ATF case in your life, hid out at HQ for a few years, got your 14 and went out as a DOO to supervise admin staff you do not have what it takes to be an ASAC. At least they see part of the problem if it is true!!!
Here is a news flash--how about if you are a sexual predator you can't be an ASAC? Having a substatiated IA jacket should not be career enhancing--but seems to be the norm in ATF. I become more embarrased being an Agent every day!!
#3
Posted 04 November 2010 - 09:23 AM
#4 Guest_Jumper_*
Posted 03 November 2010 - 09:52 PM
Gillett has been wearing an earing of late. This is pretty ridiculous for an ASAC but I guess he's trying to show his rebellousness. It's a simple Sylvester Stallone style stud version. 1982 called and they want that earing back. Next up will be a center-part mullet.WOW, One in a row. I bet the Mark Potters and George Gillettes and the John Ryans will make it a point to shoot that down. But at least they are tryin. How about, you take a ASAC job or you take a SAC job, you stay unless you promote for at least 5 yrs. No exceptions. Agents do it their whole career. Dont apply if you dont want the job. I know its hard to hit a moving target and hold somebody accountable when they only spend 1 1/2 yrs in place. Plus imagine the budgetary savings.
There are some good ASAC's out there who worked cases, ran groups, punched their HQ tickets and have earned a shot at a SAC job but the safe bet is that as one SAC job opens other SAC's will fight for it and get their good-ol-SAC-boy payback with the new division of their choice. Or maybe an AD will trump them. ATF has got to be the only Bureau or Agency under DOJ that routinely allows executives to travel downward on the career path - Domenech, Carter, Crenshaw to name just a few. Nothing says "failure" like becomeing an AD and dropping two levels to a SAC.
How about you put in for a SAC job, get it, and then stay there. What is the benefit to ATF of SAC A lateralling into SAC B's vacated spot? Why not just have the SAC's stay put and give some new blood a chance to succeed or fail? I promise you they won't do any worse.
Would Philly be worse off if Sweetow became the SAC? Would Phoenix be worse off if Charlie Smith became the SAC? Did anyone benefit when Crenshaw left the SAC Seattle job which was filled by Champion, Crenshaw fails in HQ, they clear Champion out to make room for Crenshaw to return and move Champion to Dallas? Who benefited from any of that? ATF, Crenshaw, Champion and the Seatlle FD agents all lost.
It has been the case for years. Look at LaForest. SAC Detroit to SAC Phoenix to SAC Los Angeles. For what? How did that help anyone or improve anything?
The shotcallers of ATF are afraid to give anyone a chance that is not in their club. They only promote those that they see themselves in and thus the circle of life and poor management of ATF continues.
#5
Posted 03 November 2010 - 06:58 PM
#6
Posted 03 November 2010 - 05:30 PM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users