In Crimson Tide, the Denzel Washington character is coming aboard as Executive Officer of the Alabama on short notice (something about the previous X.O. having appendicitis or something like that). He goes through an “interview” with the Captain (Gene Hackman), and it’s clear that he won’t “get the job” if he doesn’t pass the interview (including winning over the Captain’s dog)–just like any other person trying to land a job at Starbucks or Acme Office Supply or wherever. (Well, maybe not the dog part. Though in this economy you never know.)
IIRC, they did something similar at the beginning of Star Trek: The Next Generation–Captain Picard interviews Commander Riker for the First Officer job.
So–does this reflect how actual military organizations (specifically the U.S. Navy, I guess) actually work (in the late 20th century/early 21st century timeframe). I assume the skipper of an aircraft carrier doesn’t personally interview everybody–would he, in fact, “interview” and “hire” his second-in-command, or key officers, or all officers, or every single person on the ship?
Or is the whole thing Hollywood bunk, and people just show up with orders from some Bureau of Personnel somewhere and say “Howdy, Captain, I’m your new X.O.! Permission to come aboard?”
(While we’re at it, same questions for military and air force units, too.)
In the case of Riker, I didn’t have the impression that Picard was interviewing Riker as part of an audition; Riker had already been assigned. He was rather trying to get a feel for Riker so that he could see how they would go about working together; he was letting Riker know what would be expected of him. I recall Picard saying something like “Command must often present a warm, approachable face to his officers and crew, even more so when there’s goddamn children on board because of the idiots at Starfleet. That’s your job and I will ream your ass if you don’t do it well.”
(Picard was of course more diplomatic.)
I don’t think the Denzel Washington character in CT was in danger of not getting the assignment either. He’d been reassigned in a hurry because the previous XO was ill, and the Gene Hackman character’s sub was about to deploy; there was no time for that. The Hackman character was letting the Washington character know what was expected of him.
CO will have been told of the new XO before he arrives, and would probably have access to his service history and fitness reports. But there is no normal process by which he gets to interview candidates. BuPers basically says “Here’s a qualified officer that we’ve selected - it’s now up to you two to do a good job running your ship.”
Not U.S. military, but in mt personal experience, it’s SOP for officers to have a one-one-one chat with new subordinates when they arrive, to get to know each other and make sure they’re on the same wavelength. I’m sure that some officers couch this talk in the form of an interview; I’m also sure that SO’s have then called their SO and said “I don’t like the guy - please assign him somewhere else.”
I’ve read in a few places that the XO’s job is essentially that - being the approachable one who deals with the everyday personnel issues so that the Captain has the time to make the long-term plans, and the mental rescources to make the major decisions.
Right - every new officer’s first actions on board will be to meet the Captain, the XO and any officer who is his superior in the chain of command.
I think this would be unusual, are generally frowned upon. The attitude would be “It’s not your job to disapprove of officers that have, by those experienced in personnel evaluation, been found to be qualified. It’s your job to work with them and obtain good performance from them. If down the road you find this officer’s performance unsatisfactory, you should duly note same in his fitness report.”
My experience was almost exactly the opposite. The XO was the disciplinarian (unless you really fucked up) - although he did handle almost all day-to-day stuff. The Captain was cheerful, friendly, and charismatic. US Navy CV (aircraft carrier)- circa late 1980’s.
This was also my experience in the Coast Guard in the 1980s. The CO wouldn’t say anything if he caught you committing a horrible crime such as being outside without a hat. But he certainly would say something in private to your department head, who would come down on you like a load of bricks.
I never heard of CO’s picking their officers. I suppose one could be buddies with the detailer who assigns people to their next duty station and lobby for one. I did have a CO who successfully lobbied for me, an E-6, to keep me from being transferred 200 miles away when I had six months left, just gotten married and was finishing my degree at night school. Thanks, Commander.
Did have a couple stations where the CO and XO did not get along. Also the tours for CO and XO were staggered so a new XO would arrive when the COs tour was half done.
Not military but this is pretty much the model for most business or governmental organizational structures on the planet. The second is command is usually the disciplinary bulldog.
I can’t imagine any military organisation being able to function if COs undertook personal hires of their immediate subordinates. Improper patronage would run wild; the military would start self-selecting for all the wrong characteristics. Horrible little nests of mutual back slapping would emerge far worse than anything that already unavoidably exists.
Zakalwe, I had heard that the USN had a practice of making naval aviators captains of CVNs, because they knew most about the pointy-end decisions of when it was safe to launch the prime weapons for which the vessel existed. If that’s so, then I can imagine that the operating dynamic on a CVN might necessarily be different because unlike other classes of vessel, the captain’s qualifications are not primarily in seamanship. Any substance in that, or am I just speculating out my wazoo?
On a submarine, every new crewmember’s check-in procedure includes an interview with the CO. On the other hand, I don’t remember even being taken to meet my department head when I reported in to the tender.
On my CV (not CVN, but that’s not relevant for this discussion), both the CO and XO were aviators. In fact, when the new CO took over midway through my stint, he said that you never ask a naval aviator what they fly, if they are a fighter pilot, they’ll tell you and if they aren’t, you don’t want to embarrass them. The XO was an A-6 (not fighter) pilot. They actually turned out to be a great combination and as far as I could see, worked really well together.
My understanding is that the “XO is the bulldog” is pretty consistent in all Navy commands (that includes bases, squadrons, and ships - boats may be different, subs have some differences imposed by the extreme conditions under which they operate) - although, as always, personalities can differ. A hardass will be a hardass regardless. It’s just that the XO is expected to be a hardass - even if he doesn’t really want to be.
No sweat man. I was actually kind of curious to see if things had changed that much from my time. Seems like they haven’t.
I recall running across an excerpt from a (Korean War vintage) USN junior officer’s manual regarding the “courtesy call” that the JO was expected to make on the CO as soon as practical after reporting aboard. It went on at some length about how this was an opportunity for the two to meet in an informal, non-military setting, get to know one another, establish a good working relationship, etc, etc. Then it concluded with something like, “Of course, all protocols of rank will be scrupulously observed.”
Way to ensure that it will be a fun occasion, guys.
Well, I’m shocked, shocked, that Hollywood might have made something up. (Or that I might have misinterpreted something that I was watching in a movie or TV show.)