I think that awarding the medal after the end of the first operational posting makes more sense. It signifies that the member was trained and did their job for 3-4 years.
The US military launched a review of its medal system in response to the need to recognize contributions from capabilities that didn't exist before e.g., drone operators. We might want to do the same if, for no other reason, than to avoid 'medal inflation':
Medal Fatigue
After a bitter controversy over how to recognize the contributions those who fly drones stateside make to the fight against global terrorism, the Pentagon is undertaking a “comprehensive review” of the entire awards system. It’s long overdue.
Among Secretary Chuck Hagel’s first acts when he succeeded Panetta was to suspend the medal pending more review. By April, the man who had earned multiple Purple Hearts for wounds suffered as an enlisted infantryman in Vietnam
rescinded the medal entirely, with a promise to create a drone “device” for attachment to other medals. Nine months later, there is still no device. Instead, Pentagon press secretary Rear Admiral John Kirby
announced that Hagel had decided to order a “comprehensive review” of the entire awards system rather “than looking piecemeal at any specific one.”
This is the right call. While details are scant on what the review board’s mission will be, it’s time for a substantial culling of the current inventory of medals and ribbons, which is bloated because of parochial service interests and the creation of a plethora of peacetime medals 30-plus years ago. Further, we need a standardization of awards, instead of the present system where the same medals and devices mean different things depending on what uniform one wears.
Indeed, the controversy of the Distinguished Warfare Medal illustrates some of the shortfalls of the system.
After a bitter controversy over how to recognize the contributions those who fly drones stateside make to the fight against global terrorism, the Pentagon
warontherocks.com