Voluntary Recall to AD?
10-13-2008, 07:14 AM
#31
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2006
Position: 737 FO/Capt/FO
Posts: 427
I was in a position to see quite a few records over the past couple years as folks came into the zone for promotion to Lt Col. Many of the guys who left AD and went to the Reserves, then came back to AD when their airlines furloughed them after 9/11, simply had really weak records over the intervening years when they were in the Reserves.
The Reserves (in general) don't tend to write OPRs that will be competitive on an active duty promotion board. Active duty OPRs tend to be "what did he do, how did he do it, what was the result" ... Reserve OPRs tend to be "what did he do" only. And, since the AF is not looking for Lt Cols to fly airplanes (the AF wants Lt Cols to be in charge of organizations and in positions of some authority on staffs), saying that he went to XXX location to drop off a plane load of Spam is not going to get you very far.
So, when those 2, 3, or 4 Reserve OPRs show up in front of a promotion board, they just don't stack up strongly enough.
It works fine for the Reserves -- but when those guys go back to active duty, they are at a MARKED disadvantage. And, the board is not going to say, "Well, this guy was in the Reserves for a few years, so we'll add a few extra points so he can compete."
I'm not saying it is right or wrong or fair. I'm just sayin' ...
The Reserves (in general) don't tend to write OPRs that will be competitive on an active duty promotion board. Active duty OPRs tend to be "what did he do, how did he do it, what was the result" ... Reserve OPRs tend to be "what did he do" only. And, since the AF is not looking for Lt Cols to fly airplanes (the AF wants Lt Cols to be in charge of organizations and in positions of some authority on staffs), saying that he went to XXX location to drop off a plane load of Spam is not going to get you very far.
So, when those 2, 3, or 4 Reserve OPRs show up in front of a promotion board, they just don't stack up strongly enough.
It works fine for the Reserves -- but when those guys go back to active duty, they are at a MARKED disadvantage. And, the board is not going to say, "Well, this guy was in the Reserves for a few years, so we'll add a few extra points so he can compete."
I'm not saying it is right or wrong or fair. I'm just sayin' ...
I definitely understand, I also don't think it's fair. That being said, there is always hope that if a member went into the Reserves/ANG and were lucky enough to get strong OPRs (for that short time) then he/she might have a fighting chance at promotion. For those with a hole in their records for the 1,2,3 reporting periods that they were not affiliated with the AF an any way might have an even greater challenge to get over the promotion hurdle.
It also has been pointed out that deployments are almost certain as this is not the AF of yesteryear!
Lifter
10-13-2008, 09:00 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: The IPA EB speaks for me
Posts: 529
Marvin- what about those w/ ACSC and postgrad degrees? Now that they are unmasked at LTC that adds a wrinkle.
The converting UAV units in AFRC/ANG sure would be my first bet for applications and then long orders- returning to active duty would be fine if you think you need over 5 years (in my opinion) to get to an AD retirement. Otherwise- AFRC and ANG- YMMV...
IF the SECDEF says the USAF now goes back up in numbers (ah, another big swing, no null allowed!) they'll be happy w/ anyone they can get, just like they let anyone out or paid when the swing went the other way.
Surf's up, again.
The converting UAV units in AFRC/ANG sure would be my first bet for applications and then long orders- returning to active duty would be fine if you think you need over 5 years (in my opinion) to get to an AD retirement. Otherwise- AFRC and ANG- YMMV...
IF the SECDEF says the USAF now goes back up in numbers (ah, another big swing, no null allowed!) they'll be happy w/ anyone they can get, just like they let anyone out or paid when the swing went the other way.
Surf's up, again.
10-13-2008, 09:56 AM
#34
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Position: Work
Posts: 507
10-13-2008, 12:18 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,105
The previous AF Secretary was pushing to get the AF down to 316,000 by the end of FY 07 to free up money for recapitalization. The new AF Secretary is pushing to go back up to 330,000.
The only other option I can see would have been to involuntarily separate some folks in 07. It would probably be a bit tougher to get those disgruntled people back when needed.
Was there a better way to do it? (Seriously, I'm asking ...)
The only other option I can see would have been to involuntarily separate some folks in 07. It would probably be a bit tougher to get those disgruntled people back when needed.
Was there a better way to do it? (Seriously, I'm asking ...)
Second, they should have offerred programs such as PALACE CHASE, Blue-to-Green etc. This would have given those who still wanted to serve the chance to do so.
If they still didn't meet their targets, offer voluntary separation with a monetary incentive. After that, involuntary separation.
With the way they did it, it was a free for all due to the money incentive. People like myself who didn't get VSP but wanted to go into the guard / reserves, tried to PALACE CHASE but were denied because they PAID too many folks out.
After my military commitment ended, I applied for a full / regular separation. The local base leadership and AFPC five (5) times denied my paperwork. Twice they shot down my separation request because "we aren't allowing anymore VSPs" even though I wasn't applying for separation under VSP. Twice my paperwork was denied because the wing leadership was unable to complete the paperwork within the required 10 days as stated on the AF Form 870 (stall tactics). The other time my package was denied for a grammar mistake on one of the forms and they made me resubmit my paperwork all the way up the chain of command again.
-Fatty
10-13-2008, 12:32 PM
#36
Moderator
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,807
After my military commitment ended, I applied for a full / regular separation. The local base leadership and AFPC five (5) times denied my paperwork. Twice they shot down my separation request because "we aren't allowing anymore VSPs" even though I wasn't applying for separation under VSP. Twice my paperwork was denied because the wing leadership was unable to complete the paperwork within the required 10 days as stated on the AF Form 870 (stall tactics). The other time my package was denied for a grammar mistake on one of the forms and they made me resubmit my paperwork all the way up the chain of command again.
-Fatty
-Fatty
10-13-2008, 01:31 PM
#37
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: The IPA EB speaks for me
Posts: 529
Marvin,
KC10 Fatboy's story is the sad but true and only 1 of the stories of the same flavor. No, you couldn't have involuntarily separated 1 body. Those of us ready to leave would have had Congress stop that I'd like to think. For years bases had sat on Palace Chase and Front and plain old, "Thank you for your service to your Country, here's the gate in your rear view mirror for the last time, good luck."
We ALL know that was the environment and those stories add up to one heck of a list of notes, warnings and cautions..... Right?
KC10 Fatboy's story is the sad but true and only 1 of the stories of the same flavor. No, you couldn't have involuntarily separated 1 body. Those of us ready to leave would have had Congress stop that I'd like to think. For years bases had sat on Palace Chase and Front and plain old, "Thank you for your service to your Country, here's the gate in your rear view mirror for the last time, good luck."
We ALL know that was the environment and those stories add up to one heck of a list of notes, warnings and cautions..... Right?
10-13-2008, 02:07 PM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 829
As far as the manning and separation policies go - it's another one of those "if it's the decision that the USAF leadership came up with, it's the wrong one." If their mouths are moving, they are wrong - manning, F-22, F-35, F-15 retirement, trying to take flight pay from enlisted aviators in certain fields, new uniforms, inexperience into UAV's, F-117 retirement, the list goes on.
For the promotion - there is no room for fairness - we all know the records get promoted. If you go to a traditional guard/reserve unit and you fly 6 days/month, you may not be able to compete with some who stayed on active duty. If you took on responsibility and/or were active in the current war, you'll probably be good to go. If not, take the fact that you have a seniority number and credited years of service with an airline as your consolation prize.
For the promotion - there is no room for fairness - we all know the records get promoted. If you go to a traditional guard/reserve unit and you fly 6 days/month, you may not be able to compete with some who stayed on active duty. If you took on responsibility and/or were active in the current war, you'll probably be good to go. If not, take the fact that you have a seniority number and credited years of service with an airline as your consolation prize.
10-14-2008, 04:32 AM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: B-737 Right
Posts: 243
YES! They should have first offerred separation with no monetary incentive. This would have allowed the people who really wanted to get out that chance (the mil haters and those who were burning for a civilian job). Why pay people who were getting out anyways?
Second, they should have offerred programs such as PALACE CHASE, Blue-to-Green etc. This would have given those who still wanted to serve the chance to do so.
If they still didn't meet their targets, offer voluntary separation with a monetary incentive. After that, involuntary separation.
With the way they did it, it was a free for all due to the money incentive. People like myself who didn't get VSP but wanted to go into the guard / reserves, tried to PALACE CHASE but were denied because they PAID too many folks out.
...
-Fatty
Second, they should have offerred programs such as PALACE CHASE, Blue-to-Green etc. This would have given those who still wanted to serve the chance to do so.
If they still didn't meet their targets, offer voluntary separation with a monetary incentive. After that, involuntary separation.
With the way they did it, it was a free for all due to the money incentive. People like myself who didn't get VSP but wanted to go into the guard / reserves, tried to PALACE CHASE but were denied because they PAID too many folks out.
...
-Fatty
That having been said, I think the AF would set an interesting precedent for itself if it offered early outs to folks without a monetary incentive. Then it becomes, "How come you let that guy out early but you won't let me out early." The answer is, "Because we had a special program, and he was paid a bonus when he left."
Not saying its right or wrong, but by paying a bonus and making it a "limited time offer", the AF gets to know more quickly that it will meet its end of FY goal.
I don't know a lot about Palace Chase, etc, but my guess would be that those programs are a two-way street, requiring active interest from Reserves, Army, etc. Were those organizations prepared to offer jobs to XXX number of separating AF pilots? I don't know ... maybe they were, maybe they weren't.
At that time, the decision was made to separate XXX number of pilots by the end of the FY. That didn't leave much time to go through a couple programs to get the numbers down -- unfortunately, the cost of doing business under the existing fiscal system imposed by our government.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
