Image 01 Image 03

In Latest Blow to Military Effectiveness, U.S. Navy Will No Longer Require Sailors to Pass Physical Fitness Tests

In Latest Blow to Military Effectiveness, U.S. Navy Will No Longer Require Sailors to Pass Physical Fitness Tests

Old standard forcing sailors out after 2 failed PT tests rescinded; Navy claims new rule has nothing to do with recruiting challenges

It has long been the case that U.S. Navy officers and sailors were required to pass twice-yearly physical fitness tests consisting of core (sit-ups, or more recently, forearm plank), upper body (pushups), and cardiovascular endurance (1.5 mile run or other equivalent cardio) testing.

Until recently, sailors had two chances to pass the PT test, but after that, they were forced out—not immediately, but forced out in the sense that they would no longer be allowed to re-enlist or be promoted, so they would eventually be forced to separate from active duty, in most cases short of their 20-year retirement eligibility.

But now that is all changed.

Military.com has the story: Sailors Who Fail 2 Consecutive Fitness Tests Will No Longer Face the End of Their Career, Navy Says:

Sailors who fail two consecutive fitness assessments will no longer automatically have their Navy careers brought to an end, according to a new service policy unveiled this week.

Under the old system, sailors who failed one physical fitness assessment, or PFA, lost their ability to be promoted until they were able to pass another test, but their careers would largely proceed onward. However, failing another consecutive PFA would end a career by taking away the ability to be promoted or to reenlist.

The Navy will now allow those career-ending actions to come at the discretion of a sailor’s commanding officer instead of a fleet-wide mandate, the service said in an administrative message explaining the new policy that was sent out Tuesday.

I can tell you that as a former Commanding Officer of an operational attack submarine, constantly dealing with manning shortages, that it would have been awfully tempting to let a sailor slide on their PT test results, rather than losing that person, especially if we were soon departing on deployment.

And that’s not the only benefit for sailors under the new program.

Military.com continues:

“Commanding officers can now evaluate a sailor’s physical readiness progress or lack of progress in performance evaluations, giving them the ability to manage risk, recognize earnest effort, and best take care of their people,” Vice Adm. Rick Cheeseman, the chief of naval personnel, said in the administrative message.

The new policy says sailors who fail any PFA no longer have to have it noted on their annual evaluation — though they still lose their advancement eligibility until they are able to pass another test.

Dropping this requirement means that sailors who fail once are not necessarily forced to address it when applying for programs where their evaluations are considered, which in turn keeps them more competitive.

Meanwhile, enlisted sailors who fail their second consecutive PFA are no longer required to receive the lowest possible score in the “Military Bearing/Professionalism” category and to be denied the ability to reenlist.

Retention “eligibility for enlisted members will be at the discretion of the CO,” the memo says. In exercising that discretion, commanders should consider a sailor’s “qualification for continued service,” “their overall ability to contribute to Navy missions,” and “the likelihood of improvement in meeting PFA standards within the next 12 months.”

[emphasis added]

Not having a failed PT test noted on a sailor’s annual evaluation is HUGE: This means promotion boards might now be promoting sailors to leadership ranks and positions who are fat and out-of-shape. Who cares, I guess.

And why the big push now to drop the “get in shape or get out” requirement? Does it have anything to do with the Navy’s abysmal recruiting (“U.S. Navy, Faced with Recruiting Nightmare, Begins Accepting High School Dropouts“) and retention numbers? Of course not!

The change, according to the message, is part of the Navy’s push to revamp its culture of leadership and service and is an effort to modernize “our PFA policy to acknowledge our diverse population, increase sailor trust, and enhance quality of service.”

I’m not sure if this new policy enhances the “quality” of a sailor’s service when they suffer no ill-consequences of being fat and out-of-shape to the point of not being required to pass the PT test (twice).

And what does it mean that the new policy “acknowledges” the Navy’s “diverse population”? Are they saying that minority sailors can’t pass the PT test? Sounds pretty racist to me.

And, while the previous policy might seem a bit onerous, it has already been loosened up over the years in a number of significant ways:

It is the latest in a series of changes to the fitness test that has come in recent years.

In February, the sea service announced that it was resetting the counter on PFA failures fleet-wide, enabling up to 1,500 sailors to keep serving.

In November, the Navy decided to ditch a postpartum PFA that new mothers would typically be expected to take less than a year after giving birth.

Ever since emerging from the restrictions of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Navy has also kept to the pandemic-era change of conducting only one PFA per year instead of two. Tuesday’s message also continues this trend into 2025.

Think about what that means: if the PT test is only given once a year, even under the old policy sailors had two years to get in shape if they were overweight. All they had to do was avoid failing two tests in a row. How hard can that be? You can’t put the donuts down for two years? WTF?

And of course, the Navy made even more excuses for the new policy:

Critics have argued that many of the changes were the Navy relaxing its standards in the face of a challenging recruiting environment and an increasingly overweight population of Americans.

Officials in Cheeseman’s office, however, provided data to Military.com in November that showed the number of sailors failing PFAs had remained very low.

So what? That doesn’t address the question. Why now?

I’m so disgusted by the current state of the U.S. military, and the Navy in particular, I’m not sure how I’m even continuing to post military updates anymore. Ucch.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Tags:
,

Comments


 
 0 
 
 5
E Howard Hunt | June 26, 2024 at 7:10 am

Let’s apply it to medical students who fail their medical exams but display “earnest effort.”


 
 0 
 
 12
nordic prince | June 26, 2024 at 7:28 am

Navy claims new rule has nothing to do with recruiting challenges

Uh-huh. “Nothing to do with recruiting challenges. Riiiiight.


 
 0 
 
 2
Kingfisher | June 26, 2024 at 7:35 am

Hey Taiwan Philippines Israel Australia Africa: South Korea and everywhere else:

America is sending you a message loud and clear:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ka1wkXjeEz8&pp=ygUhQmxhemluZyBzYWRkbGVzIHlvdXJlIG9uIHlvdXIgb3du


 
 0 
 
 7
CommoChief | June 26, 2024 at 7:40 am

While the ht/wt standards are sometimes asinine the actual physical fitness tests are not. I had an NCO who I had write up every time we did a ht/wt screening. The guy was by the book ‘overweight’ at 6’1 225 but wasn’t fat, dude was built like a tank and maxed out his physical fitness tests. Downplaying the significance of a PT test failure is Cray Cray. Morale is going to suffer and good solid troops are gonna either get out in disgust or start slacking off b/c why bother if it is no longer a priority.

    Similar thing happened to an acquaintance back in my active Air Force days (late 70s). Built like a bulldog, but technically overweight & forced out.

    And your good, solid troops are going to get out; they have too much self-respect to slack off.

    Might as well dock the ships, park the tanks and ground the aircraft. We no longer have a military.


       
       0 
       
       5
      diver64 in reply to Rusty Bill. | June 26, 2024 at 11:08 am

      Happened to me but I was not forced out. My BMI was over the max allowed due to my weight training. That I ran a 4:20 mile and The All American Marathon didn’t matter. Took my Top, a 101 Airborne Vietnam Vet who backed down from nobody, to step up and come to my defense. The Brigade Commander just said OK after he showed up.


         
         0 
         
         1
        diver64 in reply to diver64. | June 26, 2024 at 11:11 am

        Top was funny but a hard man reminding me of my Grandfather who went onto Omaha. No one wanted a piece of him. Jeez, 40yrs ago and I’m laughing remembering him running over every officer in sight.


 
 0 
 
 8
TargaGTS | June 26, 2024 at 7:42 am

If you’re old enough to remember the Carter Administration, everything that’s happening right now look eerily familiar; inflation, anemic growth, unending foreign policy failures and a military that is broken, fat and on drugs.


     
     0 
     
     2
    Paul in reply to TargaGTS. | June 26, 2024 at 7:58 am

    I was just old enough to start being interested in politics. Yeah I remember. I also remember the pendulum swinging back the other direction, and what we got after Carter. Dare we hope?


       
       0 
       
       2
      TargaGTS in reply to Paul. | June 26, 2024 at 8:18 am

      The pendulum isn’t swinging so much as it’s returning to the center. Why? Demographics. In 1980, Reagan won 56% of the white vote and that produced a 489 Electoral Vote landslide, one of the three or four biggest victories of the last 100-years. He only lost 6-states. In 2020, Trump won (at least) 58% of white voters….and still ‘lost’ the election, winning only 232 EVs and half the states.

      Most polls project Trump winning between 56% and 58% of the white vote again this year. Even if he has a significant improvement with Black & Latino voters, it’s still going to be a razor-thin margin in the popular vote and at best, he can win 300(ish) Electoral Votes. As the white vote continues to erode – as it has been for the last 30-years – it will become increasingly difficult for GOP candidates to win, unfortunately. The 20th Century cycles where America saw HUGE swings of the ideological pendulum from one party and then back to the other, are likely over for the foreseeable future…because of racial division.


     
     0 
     
     1
    DaveGinOly in reply to TargaGTS. | June 27, 2024 at 12:57 pm

    I’m old enough that I served during the tail end of the Ford administration and through most of the Carter administration. A bad time for having aspirations of a military career. I was crushed by what I found (in the Army) and had to leave to prevent my brain from eating itself.


 
 1 
 
 5
rhhardin | June 26, 2024 at 7:59 am

It all started coming apart with the Tailhook Scandal. Men were no longer welcome.


 
 0 
 
 3
Danny | June 26, 2024 at 8:34 am

This is the worst scandal of the navy.

I would have been correctly removed if I had failed.

The U.S. Navy has never had trouble finding enough recruits prior to going woke and frankly the amount of trust you have to have in the navy is enough that I don’t blame the young men who see what the navy is telling them and say “F U”.

Instead of allowing people who have no business being anywhere near the navy in they should be asking to go back to equality.

The physical requirements are there for very good reasons.


 
 0 
 
 4
Sailorcurt | June 26, 2024 at 9:38 am

The PRT is not difficult to pass, even for out of shape and even obese sailors, so I get the objection to the change in policy (and the contention that this has nothing to do with recruiting woes is transparently BS), but the Navy has had a strained relationship with physical fitness for as long as I can remember.

When I was in “A” school almost 50 years ago, they were only using height vs weight as the determining factor on who was “out of shape”, they hadn’t fully instituted their (inaccurate as heck) body fat measurement system yet. One of my friends in school (he was actually one of the groomsmen in my wedding) was a competitive power lifter. He was only about 5’6″ tall but was built like a brick sh1thouse and was solid muscle. His biceps were literally the size of my thighs (ask me sometime about trying to get a tux tailored for him for the wedding…that was an adventure). He was always on mandatory PT (physical training) because he was “overweight”. He was good-natured about it. He always said the hour of mandatory calisthenics every morning was a good warm up for his real work out.

On the other end, my brother ended up getting out of the Navy not because he couldn’t pass the PRT, but because he got tired of constantly having to fight to keep his body fat under the limit.

He legitimately has had a weight problem most of his life. He took after our mom and some (if not most) of his weight issues are just genetic and metabolic. He struggled with it for years to stay in the Navy, but promotions were slow and he got tired of struggling with it so he got out as an E-5 after 12 years in.

He was an Electronics Tech who specialized in secure communications and easily secured a six figure income job with AT&T as a network engineer before the ink was dry on his DD214 (this was back when a six figure income was still a lot of money…easily twice what he was making in the Navy).

The Navy isn’t infantry. Reasonable physical fitness is important for safety and emergency response on board ships for sure, but a Secure Comms tech doesn’t need to be a world-class athlete to be able to design, build and maintain a secure communications network.

If your task is to provide an effective, secure, reliable and redundant communications network would you rather have the best comms tech that’s 30 pounds overweight or a marginal tech who looks like Adonis? I know what my answer would be.

At that time the Navy disagreed. AT&T was happy to have him.

Apparently times are changing.


 
 0 
 
 0
Michael Gilson | June 26, 2024 at 10:12 am

Stand Navy out to sea, fat! our battle cry!


 
 1 
 
 5
smooth | June 26, 2024 at 10:18 am

This is the logical result of allowing women to serve in combat roles.


 
 0 
 
 5
MAJack | June 26, 2024 at 10:23 am

Lowering standards, DEI, affirmative action will all bring in our demise.


 
 0 
 
 1
Ironclaw | June 26, 2024 at 10:58 am

The days of Wooden Ships and Iron men are long past. Now it’s kind of the opposite. Apparently expectations are being set appropriately to what’s available.


     
     0 
     
     1
    Paula in reply to Ironclaw. | June 26, 2024 at 12:10 pm

    How much load can a ship carry before capsizing? Depends on how many sailors are on board.

    Total displacement of a navy vessel + weight of the crew = total displacement. These days the crew is the heavier part.


 
 0 
 
 4
smooth | June 26, 2024 at 11:20 am

Stumbling mumbling biden, international symbol of weakness. I feel sorry for americans serving in biden’s military.


 
 0 
 
 3
diver64 | June 26, 2024 at 11:22 am

“hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times”

Where does everyone think we are at? My wife and I were talking about this the other day in reference to one of her kids. Her and I are the last generation that remembers being raised by and knowing The Greatest Generation. We never realized how special they were until too late. Every year we go home on vacation and I visit my Grandfathers grave with the Military Stone and PFC WW2 inscription then go to the VFW Post that has his name and many others I knew as a kid on the wall as a founding member. Great men, all of them.


     
     0 
     
     2
    Amos Moses in reply to diver64. | June 26, 2024 at 2:14 pm

    Back then — We had leaders to lead the fighting men.

    Starting with FDR and George C. Marshall; Chester Nimitz, Hap Arnold, others (obviously)

    Those leaders have been gone for 50+ years, and nobody really remembers them.

    But they had to make many many decisions — some that are easy to second-guess years later — but they were the ones imho who really won that war.

    (Along with those 20,000,000 Russians.)

    Just my opinion, as the son of a long-gone WWII combat vet.
    Don’t agree?
    I take no offense. It’s all good.


     
     0 
     
     0
    DaveGinOly in reply to diver64. | June 27, 2024 at 1:03 pm

    Several of my uncles (on my mother’s side – a large family) served in WW II. I didn’t really know what that meant when I was a kid, but after my own service and 50+ years of reading about the war it now makes me furious to have some understanding of what they sacrificed and risked only to have our nation become what it is today.

What do whales and sailors have in common?
They’re both filled with blubber. Whereas the focus used to be on “Save the whales,” it’s now on “Save the sailors.”

I wonder if the tiny and short CNO must do the PT test?


 
 0 
 
 0
Tom Orrow | June 26, 2024 at 1:38 pm

What U.S. Navy regulations must be met, for the Commander In Chief to be keelhauled?

Hopefully the USN doesn’t relax the strict requirement for correct pronoun usage and gendering of superior officers.


 
 0 
 
 1
jolanthe | June 26, 2024 at 2:35 pm

Meanwhile, the NY Times reported recently that “ Congress is weighing proposals to update mandatory conscription, including by expanding it to women for the first time and automatically registering those eligible to be called up.”

They noted “ the idea of adding women to the draft has for years run into a brick wall of opposition among conservative Republicans, and at least one G.O.P. Senate candidate is seeking to use the issue to attack his Democratic opponent.”

The Times, inexplicably quoting Cardi B, who may know about WAP and such, said “These new kids? You want to send these new kids to fight these wars?”

“All I want to say is to America is: Good luck with that.”


     
     0 
     
     3
    henrybowman in reply to jolanthe. | June 26, 2024 at 5:59 pm

    Oh oh, I smell trouble ahead, trouble with a capital T.
    How can you add women to the draft without first deciding what a woman is?


       
       0 
       
       4
      CommoChief in reply to henrybowman. | June 26, 2024 at 8:24 pm

      Meh. It is past time that every 18 year old was subject to selective service requirements. Either we believe in basic equality for both the privileges of Citizenship and the duties of Citizenship or we don’t. IMO, we should leave the penalties in place for refusing to register with selective service but include women AND enforce the penalties at age 19; no federal jobs, no student loans and so on for failure to register. Allow folks to choose not to do so but make sure there is a price to their failure instead of turning a blind eye. For that matter ensure everyone under full SSI retirement age has registered and suffer penalties of they don’t; no student loans(existing loans called in) no federally backed mortgage, no federal jobs and so on.

      All these arguments about women being conscripted into the infantry and being handed a bayonet to form the all female Valkyrie Brigade and conduct a bayonet charge are BS. There are plenty of non combat roles women are perfectly capable of performing which in turn frees up the men who would otherwise have to do those jobs to instead serve in the pure Combat MOS of Infantry. Armor, Field Artillery.


         
         0 
         
         0
        BierceAmbrose in reply to CommoChief. | June 28, 2024 at 12:10 am

        You could be right about this one. The mottivation is right, and it plays out well, at least as a thought experiment.

        People get way more concerned about military adventurism if they might end up in the crosshairs. Plenty of gasping heads among the chattering class all wee-wee’d up about “provoking a nuclear power” in Ukraine are really just freaked to realize that they, themselves might be at risk.


 
 0 
 
 0
D38999 | June 26, 2024 at 3:59 pm

In the immortal words of Joe Biden: “Hey fat!”


 
 0 
 
 0
destroycommunism | June 26, 2024 at 9:38 pm

no real need to swim when your in the navy

ahahahahahahahahahahahahaahhaaaa


 
 0 
 
 0
destroycommunism | June 26, 2024 at 9:40 pm

I think the wnba could beat up the usa military


 
 0 
 
 0
destroycommunism | June 26, 2024 at 9:43 pm

so kust liek the afirmaction

doctors lawyers pilots etc etc

you will get the pay and ALLLL THE HONORS but you really dont have the actual meritable skills

but if you dont say “dr.’ or ilot etc

you will go to jail

its a coming


 
 0 
 
 0
destroycommunism | June 26, 2024 at 10:43 pm

how come submarines are equipped with private restrooms/showers etc for women

BUT MALES ARE ALLOWED TO SHARE RESTROOMS/SHOWERS in the public sphere


 
 0 
 
 0
DSHornet | June 27, 2024 at 9:55 am

I’ve never been well muscled. This caused problems on paper off-and-on while in the AF and AirNG because I’ve never been able to keep up with so many others doing pushups and pullups but I got past the PT requirements since I could run with the best of them. I never had trouble doing my job, which included picking up and moving the attack radar modulator-receiver-transmitter for the F-111 aircraft, a unit that (IIRC) weighed around a hundred pounds, when bench testing in the shop. Nor was there a problem with reconfiguring the camera suite in the nose of an RF-4C.
.


 
 0 
 
 2
BMF5533 | June 27, 2024 at 1:06 pm

Standards? What standards?

It has nothing to do with failure to meet recruiting goals just like lowering the standards in previous years had nothing to do with increasing women in all of the Services.

I served 21 years in the Marine Corps as an infantry officer with 3 years in combat. My first job out of college was as a Marine platoon commander in Vietnam 1969. I absolutely guarantee that except for women who were cross-fit professionals or Olympic athletes could have survived the mental and physical stresses in Vietnam. The physical loads (ammo was more important than food) were heavy and the terrain made it many times worse. There there was no sneaking into the bushes to relieve yourself. You did where you stood. Diseases and infections were a constant problem as well as diarrhea, leeches, ring worm, and lack of resupply in those days. Water was always a problem because there was no such thing as bottled water. We filled canteens with whatever was available but during the monsoon season rain water was the best..

The services can make all of the excuses they want to cover the fact that they are lowering standards because they can’t recruit. They done it for decades.


 
 0 
 
 0
Fat_Freddys_Cat | June 27, 2024 at 3:12 pm

When I was in the Navy (’70s-’80s) the PT test was something of a joke. Maybe it’s tougher now, but I doubt it. I was hardly what you would call an athlete but I never had any trouble with it.

The body fat measurements were pretty useless; as others have noted a trained athlete could be out of specs while a dough-bellied Chief would pass.


 
 0 
 
 0
CaptTee | June 27, 2024 at 3:45 pm

I agree with having a physical fitness requirement, but it should be reasonable. Testing should be related to one’s job or what one might be called on to do under battle conditions.
For instance, unlike in WWII German U-Boats, we don’t require submariners to run to the front of the sub for a crash dive, and even if we did, who would running a mile and a half be a relevant test for submariners?


 
 0 
 
 0
CaptTee | June 27, 2024 at 3:48 pm

[need and edit function]
‘even if we did, HOW would running a mile and a half be a relevant test for submariners?”

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.