Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Thread: Ar 190-56

  1. #1
    Forum Member
    DACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    No clue
    Posts
    4,603

    Ar 190-56

    Just received a copy of the revised 190-56, this is a revision to the one dated 27 Sept 2006. Was just wondering if any one else has seen this version yet? (It is only in draft form right now) personally I am getting tired of all the changes yes changes needed to be made, but it seems like for the past 4 years it has been one huge circle with all of this. Just when we get something negotiated out, something new comes along and we are back at the beginning.

  2. #2
    Ich habe die Kraft
    Army_Soldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    54
    I have not seen the new version. Didn't even know there was one. Is it in PDF format?
    I don't need probable cause to search your vehicle... AR 190-5.

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    DACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    No clue
    Posts
    4,603
    No, it has not been released in PDF format yet; basically AFGE or other applicable bargaining units have 30 days to respond with comments to the PMG.
    Some of the highlights are: unless you have a previous waver before a certain date you will have to attend the academy, credentials are no longer issued, the PAT has changed again the main events are run, pushups, vertical jump; alternate events include 2.5 mi walk, and a dummy drag, there are provisions for wavers but the policy stinks.

  4. #4
    Ich habe die Kraft
    Army_Soldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    54
    Some of the things in 190-56 I have not always agreed with, but who am I? It has however kept some smaller installations (like mine) from hiring a fly-by-night minimum wage paying security company to protect their Installations. (A good thing.) I have seen some guards at military bases that I wonder how they keep their job because of being... obese to put it nicely. Maybe the PAT standards will force the select few who fall into that catagory to get with the program.

    That being said, I have seen many, many more soldiers on the obese side. I can't for the life of me understand how they can still remain in. They say it's gone, but I think the good ole boy system in still thriving, and are hiding, protecting, inputting wrong information or flat out ignoring soldiers who do not even come close to meeting AR 600-9 standards.
    I don't need probable cause to search your vehicle... AR 190-5.

  5. #5
    Operator
    Bearcat357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    18,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Army_Soldier View Post
    Maybe the PAT standards will force the select few who fall into that catagory to get with the program.
    There already is a PFT for Army Guards..... BUT....word came out from the PMG that if they fail....for now...they are to stay on contract....and work on the issue....

  6. #6
    Ich habe die Kraft
    Army_Soldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by Bearcat357 View Post
    There already is a PFT for Army Guards..... BUT....word came out from the PMG that if they fail....for now...they are to stay on contract....and work on the issue....
    Could this mean they will have their own version of the flag, weight control program and things of that nature? I.E. counseling or something to that effect, set a goal, track progress and things of that nature?

    I am definately not a person who wants anyone to lose their job unless they do something to deserve it, but for those of us who work their butts off to keep and maintain the standard, it is almost a slap in the face to watch others do as they please due to being lazy or don't care and knowing nothing will be done about it.

    All of my experience is on the military side of the house, but I am sure there are DOD security and LEO's that feel the same way. (Either that or I am just too set in my ways when it comes to certain standards having to be met).
    I don't need probable cause to search your vehicle... AR 190-5.

  7. #7
    Operator
    Bearcat357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    18,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Army_Soldier View Post
    Could this mean they will have their own version of the flag, weight control program and things of that nature? I.E. counseling or something to that effect, set a goal, track progress and things of that nature?
    I doubt it.....

    It is supposed to be go/no go....and if you are a no go, you are canned from the contract and are not allowed to re-apply........

    Thus far, the new Army directive our office got was that if they fail, they are still to be retained on the contract till further notice....and that was it...

  8. #8
    Ich habe die Kraft
    Army_Soldier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    54
    Just like Big Army to put out a policy, then say stand by to stand by on dealing with it.
    I don't need probable cause to search your vehicle... AR 190-5.

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    DACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    No clue
    Posts
    4,603
    Quote Originally Posted by Army_Soldier View Post
    I am definately not a person who wants anyone to lose their job unless they do something to deserve it, but for those of us who work their butts off to keep and maintain the standard, it is almost a slap in the face to watch others do as they please due to being lazy or don't care and knowing nothing will be done about it.

    All of my experience is on the military side of the house, but I am sure there are DOD security and LEO's that feel the same way. (Either that or I am just too set in my ways when it comes to certain standards having to be met).
    The military standard is different from the Civilian standard, just as the Marines have different standards then the Army. You would be opposed to the Army applying one of the Marine standards on you. Should there be a standard yes, but when you hire someone based off of the % of their disability from the VA, then place them in a job for a number of years, you cannot expect them to do what they are asking them to do and not provide accommodations for the reason that got them the job in the first place. To me the only thing this regulation accomplishes is to make it easier for a DA civilian to lose their job and a contractor to replace them.

  10. #10
    Operator
    Bearcat357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    18,342
    Quote Originally Posted by DACP View Post
    To me the only thing this regulation accomplishes is to make it easier for a DA civilian to lose their job and a contractor to replace them.
    DOA LEOs will not be replaced by Contractors.......never happen CONUS.... The Army will always call up NG/Reserve units to fill in if need be.....or hire more DOA LEOs.....

    The Gates are a done deal with Contractors....as every Army Installation has Contractors at their gates at least for the next 4 years.....

    As for my opinion......if you want to be a LEO....no matter if it is in a town, out in a county, or on an military installations, you need to meet physical fitness requirements.... The ones the Army is going to eventually put in place are not that bad.....

    Just me I guess....

  11. #11
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Midwest US
    Posts
    2
    You are right, we do need some standards. 350 lbs officers taking two shots of insulin for diabetes a day is probably not a good thing for a Road Officer. I saw this one guy bend over on the pistol range and split his BDU pants from calf to the other calf, due to his obesity. I almost cried laughing. But the reality of it, is that he is a liability on the road. If you run 24 minutes for 1.5 miles...you'd think, just maybe, that you should move on to another career field. Now we are changing the PT standards, and the guys who failed it last time, still continue to stay on the departments. What are we doing here?

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    inveich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Where the stars are big and bright
    Posts
    397
    Just my 2 cents, I active army, but my uncle told me that an officer in his department was killed because he was overweight and didnt look professional to the guy that killed him. The guy apparently checked out LEO's in front of a store that was frequesnted and would walk past them and look at their build, uniform, etc and he picked the overweight guy and whacked him. His reasoning was he was the least professional of them all. Thats something to think about, regular people will look at LEO's and expect a degree of proffessionalism, ie uniform appearence, weight, etc and they make their own minds up.......plus, if your overweight you probably can't catch a fleeing person on foot....but, then again, that same department hired a guy with a prostetic leg, put him on bike patrol, and the guy cought a fleeing drug dealer on foot, both of them were on foot, he left his bike behind, he climbed fences, jumped garbage cans........its all in your appearence.
    Want to start a website? I run Host Lonestar.
    Texas Discussion blog about texas...forum as well

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    DACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    No clue
    Posts
    4,603
    Don’t get me wrong, I am all for a standard of professional appearance, I also understand that there is a little latitude when it comes to that stuff. I realy do not care what some ones weight is and if there belly hangs out a bit, so long as they can perform the job that is all that matters to me. The issue that I have with the PAT is that about 85% of the DA Guards were hired solely based on there disability rating from the VA and every one was happy with the way they did there job now years later for some reason they want to enact a PAT to ensure they can perform there job, why? This would be like the Light House for the Blind hiring some one who is blind then telling them sorry have to let you go, you can not read the signs on the wall, every organization under the sun would be screaming foul over that. DA Police do not get any kind of LE pay, no hazardous duty pay, just the regular old GS what ever pay, the same as any other GS worker, yet the standard is way higher. No one will argue that a DA Fire fighter has a strenuous job, with many hazards that require a level of fitness, same with the EMS workers, yet none of them are required to perform any type of PAT. If there must be a PAT then it needs to reflect for age, and the disabilities that officers have that got them the job in the first place. The regulation over all sucks, it is not just about a PAT, which is only one small part of the whole picture, but more about the very core of the job preformed. And sure I could go some where else and get a job, but I love doing the job that I do and continuing the service to the Army that I started years ago when I enlisted, which is more then likely the same reason that many of the Officers do what they do.

  14. #14
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5
    the pat is a small part of ar 190-56. the bigger items are the credenials, given the power of statutory arrest, authority to carry ccw to and from work, and recognized as federal leo's, since we do the job of a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.

  15. #15
    Forum Member
    DACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    No clue
    Posts
    4,603
    Quote Originally Posted by B#63 View Post
    the pat is a small part of ar 190-56. the bigger items are the credenials, given the power of statutory arrest, authority to carry ccw to and from work, and recognized as federal leo's, since we do the job of a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER.
    Yah but until federal law is changed we are hosed on many of those things. I still find it funny that some how some way the Pentagon police have full power and all that other goody goody stuff, but they are unable to do it for the DACP.

  16. #16
    Operator
    Bearcat357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    18,342
    Quote Originally Posted by DACP View Post
    I still find it funny that some how some way the Pentagon police have full power
    PFPA got statutue authority after 9/11. And if I recall correctly, they were able to do it because they fall under the Sec of Defense (a civilian) and not a military commander like Installation Police do......

  17. #17
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    5
    you officers are right, until congress changes the defenition of Fed Leo's in the US code and the CFR, the military branches especially the Army will not grant us that authority. Can you see us with the authority to arrest, then the Officers of the army will be subject to arrest, and that will not happen by its own so called police force.

  18. #18
    Forum Member
    DACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    No clue
    Posts
    4,603
    Quote Originally Posted by B#63 View Post
    Can you see us with the authority to arrest, then the Officers of the army will be subject to arrest, and that will not happen by its own so called police force.
    Yah, no kidding heaven forbid that an officer be held to the same regulations that they write.

  19. #19
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Delmarva
    Posts
    553
    Is this all new and in affect now?

    (Or, more directly) As someone who doesn't know too much about the old regulations /v/ the new regulations - what has changed in this update? And when does it go in to order.


    Also, when the posting on CPOL says Vacancy: 40, does that mean their hiring forty folks? Cause wow.

  20. #20
    Operator
    Bearcat357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    18,342
    Quote Originally Posted by LochRaven View Post
    Is this all new and in affect now?
    No...they just made some changes (I haven't seen it yet....) and it's not in effect till later on this summer (supposedly)....

    Quote Originally Posted by LochRaven View Post
    what has changed in this update? And when does it go in to order.
    No clue as stated....I am sure since DACP has seen it.....he can tell you what's new or changed. I do know the PT test is being changed.....think some initial training has changed....and a few other things.... I am sure the Unions will get involved...and will go back and forth for a while before it's in force...

    Quote Originally Posted by LochRaven View Post
    Also, when the posting on CPOL says Vacancy: 40, does that mean their hiring forty folks? Cause wow.
    Not sure of the vacancy you are talking about....send/post a link and let me see if I can figure it out.... I can usually figure things out on most postings or make a call to see what's up....

  21. #21
    Forum Member
    DACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    No clue
    Posts
    4,603
    Quote Originally Posted by Bearcat357 View Post
    ....I am sure since DACP has seen it.....he can tell you what's new or changed....
    Shhh it’s a secret… And since I had to retake that silly class on safeguarding secret and confidential material, if I told you I’d have to kill you or something like that... umm I know something I won’t tell…. Ok sorry have been around the kids all day and I think it is starting to show……. some of the changes are removal of the standardized credentials (sorry folks PMG don’t think we need em) mandates that ALL DACP attend the DACP academy, wavers are granted only for those who previously have a waver dated on or before Sep 20 (?) 2006; changes the PAT, pushups, 1.5 mi run, and vertical jump; adds alternate events pushups= 25 feet dummy drag (140-150lb) run= 2.5 mi walk. Mandates all DACP and DAG have FTO time (each has different requirement) stipulates some of the core training that all will receive spells it out better for supervisors then for the officers. Defines some stuff that contractors must have in their contracts (not that I really are about the contractors) there is some other stuff this is all I could think of off the top of my head. Right now the ball is in Unions court they have until end of this week (I think)might be next to comment back to PMG. for those that are Labor, the local should have a copy of the draft, for management hopefully DES or PM has a copy, and like Bear stated should be sometime this summer that it is implemented then the fun begins all over again with negotiations on the local level.

  22. #22
    Operator
    Bearcat357's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    18,342
    Quote Originally Posted by DACP View Post
    removal of the standardized credentials (sorry folks PMG don’t think we need em)
    Once again, the Army not wanting to treat their LEOs like LEOs...

    Quote Originally Posted by DACP View Post
    mandates that ALL DACP attend the DACP academy, wavers are granted only for those who previously have a waver dated on or before Sep 20 (?) 2006;
    So....that means the DACP Academies will be all jammed up....or will they allow each post to have an academy....? What about waivers for folks that have been LEOs on the outside for 20 years....or MPs that have been doing that for 20 years.....?

    Quote Originally Posted by DACP View Post
    changes the PAT, pushups, 1.5 mi run, and vertical jump; adds alternate events pushups= 25 feet dummy drag (140-150lb) run= 2.5 mi walk.
    Meh....just go with Army PFT and be done with it......

    Quote Originally Posted by DACP View Post
    Mandates all DACP and DAG have FTO time (each has different requirement) stipulates some of the core training that all will receive spells it out better for supervisors then for the officers.
    Toss up......if the FTO program is good, then ok....if it sucks...then not so ok...

    Quote Originally Posted by DACP View Post
    Defines some stuff that contractors must have in their contracts (not that I really are about the contractors)
    That's for the Access Control Guards....and I've seen most of that..... Stupid stuff there....as it doesn't match up with the new Performance Work Standards that the Guards are supposed to be doing...how they get hired...how they get fired...and all that...

    And folks wonder why I am ready to leave after 90 days of stupidity.....

  23. #23
    Forum Member
    DACP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    No clue
    Posts
    4,603
    Quote Originally Posted by Bearcat357 View Post
    So....that means the DACP Academies will be all jammed up....or will they allow each post to have an academy....? What about waivers for folks that have been LEOs on the outside for 20 years....or MPs that have been doing that for 20 years.....?
    It gets better, the idea is to do away with the ones at White sands, and Aberdeen, and just have the one at lost in the woods…..did I forget to mention the 1 year time limit to attend it is confusing as to how they plan or getting all this done, I for one will have to go 15 years combined MP and DACP and now all of the sudden I have to go, oh yah the Academy is 12-16hr days but you only get 8hs over time is not authorized …

    Quote Originally Posted by Bearcat357 View Post
    Meh....just go with Army PFT and be done with it......
    Same here, still think there needs to be wavers and profile kind of thing, and an age scale.....oh wait just like the PFT
    Quote Originally Posted by Bearcat357 View Post
    Toss up......if the FTO program is good, then ok....if it sucks...then not so ok...
    This issue is skirted so to speak as it does not define how things are to go, just states that the School house will publish guidance, so more or less it places the program at the post to jack it up.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bearcat357 View Post
    That's for the Access Control Guards....and I've seen most of that..... Stupid stuff there....as it doesn't match up with the new Performance Work Standards that the Guards are supposed to be doing...how they get hired...how they get fired...and all that...
    I have a strong dislike for the contract security guys (the Idea not the workers) so to me they can stick it to them any way they want.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bearcat357 View Post
    And folks wonder why I am ready to leave after 90 days of stupidity
    I hear you on that, for reasons I will not go into here, I do not state what it is I actually do (post section etc) I have no idea what keeps me doing this stuff but it sure is not anything in the regulation, or the section I work in, but enough about that and back onto topic …..This draft went backwards in many areas and forward in others and in the end it is still jacked up.

  24. #24
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Delmarva
    Posts
    553
    Bearcat:

    Can't get the link to copy right, but its in reference to the posting at APG (the one I asked about in the other thread) for Security Guard and Police Officer positions. I think one is Vacancy: 40 and the other is Vacancy: 30. Of course, on USAJobs their both listed as 1 each, but that doesn't mean anything, especially with CPOL. They just had a posting for these positions about a month ago, so they must have not received enough applications - or something may be wonky.

  25. #25
    Forum Member
    fedguy889's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    915
    Quote Originally Posted by DACP View Post
    I for one will have to go 15 years combined MP and DACP and now all of the sudden I have to go, oh yah the Academy is 12-16hr days but you only get 8hs over time is not authorized …
    Are you saying that even though you are already with DACP (and apparently have been for awhile now), you WILL be sent to the new academy?? That makes no sense at all. Oh wait this is the Fed gov't we're tlaking about isn't it? Ridiculous...We didnt get OT for FLETC either, and then my agency said oops, we were supposed to pay you OT. We received a check for it all.
    Dispatch, we have a 9-11, Armed Robbery in progress. Seay's Surplus Store, corner People's Drive and 124th Street.

Page 1 of 2 12 Last

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Click here to log in or register