VADM Fowler's response to Fleming (NYT)

Let me clarify my last post.

I do not see them as AD because they are not eligible for short notice TDY or deployments. Yes, they must adhere to UCMJ, but that does not mean they are Active Duty in a traditional sense.

Yes, in essence, they are military members, they have their CAC, but there is a difference in AD and what the military can place upon them and what they can place upon a cadet. To say an AD military member is the same pool as the cadet is incorrect. I bend and say they are AD military members, but I will not bend to say they are FULL TIME AD. Full time means to me you are charged leave, and additionally they can send your arse anywhere they want to at a moment's notice. This is not the case for an SA cadet/

Are you really trying to say that cadets are equal to AD members in every aspect? That was my point. They aren't. They are still cadets. This is their learning period with limited aspects of the AD world. There is more to AD than just the UCMJ.

BTW I am well aware of the vet status because it comes into play big time when you retire. Bullet works now for the govt, and his military experience (yrs) played into how many leave days he was eligible for because those yrs count.

Finally, let's really drive home the point of it being AD. An SA cadet comes in as O1 with no yrs. The military does not count those yrs as AD regarding pay scales. I bend to that. If the military deemed cadets as AD they would enter as O1 with 4 yrs. They don't! They enter as O1 with O, just like ROTC or OCS.

Does the military pay for the cadet to move every summer out of the dorms, i.e per diem, TLA, DLA, etc? Do they have a moving weight allowance like the AD? It is not enough to say they pay the air fare because they are on orders. There is a lot more to a PCS. A PCS occurs after 6 months on station. If you say this is not a PCS, but just leave, because they are returning to their station. Then the fact is they go through more than 30 days of leave per yr, which is what an AD member accrues annually. How can you be AD have more than 30 days leave? Tally it up for me...5 days Thanksgiving, 20 days Winter, 10 days spring, 21 days summer...that is more than 30 days. Anyone AD knows that 30 days is not 6 weeks of 5 day work weeks. Take leave on Saturday and return the following Monday and it counts as 9, not 5, those 2 weekends count as leave, even though they were weekends.

A cadet is not allowed to be married or have dependents...an AD member is. The cadet can not even as a C1C get a VA loan. The military has shown through various ways, deployment, benefits, and pay that they do not deem the cadet as an AD military member. UCMJ is just a vary small part of qualifying a service member as FULL TIME AD.

Now let's get back on track to Fowler.

His reputation will be just fine. Fowler falling on this sword has no impact on his future career. As a recent retired wife, the job was already signed on the dotted line before this piece. He wanted to make it his last stand regarding his beliefs. Left, Right or Center, Good for him to say it.
 
Last edited:
Pima said:
Let me clarify my last post.

I do not see them as AD because they are not eligible for short notice TDY or deployments. Yes, they must adhere to UCMJ, but that does not mean they are Active Duty in a traditional sense.
Click to expand...

Pima, regardless of how you interpret their servce, cadets at the USMA, USAFA, and USCGA, and midshipmen at the USNA are all active duty military.

Period.

That is the law.

TITLE 38 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > § 101

(21) The term “active duty” means—

(D) service as a cadet at the United States Military, Air Force, or Coast Guard Academy, or as a midshipman at the United States Naval Academy;

There is no argument here.
 
Pima said:
Let me clarify my last post.

I do not see them as AD because they are not eligible for short notice TDY or deployments. Yes, they must adhere to UCMJ, but that does not mean they are Active Duty in a traditional sense.

Yes, in essence, they are military members, they have their CAC, but there is a difference in AD and what the military can place upon them and what they can place upon a cadet.

Are you really trying to say that cadets are equal to AD members in every aspect? That was my point. They aren't. They are still cadets. This is their learning period with limited aspects of the AD world. There is more to AD than just the UCMJ.
Click to expand...


A private in Basic Training is active duty, even though he/she doesn't deploy. A cadet/mid at a SA is in a similar situation. That is, they are in a training status for eventual service in the operational elements of their respective branches. The training status for SAs just happens to take four years, and involves a comprehesive undergraduate education as well as officer training. This doesn't make them somehow less than active duty.

If a cadet/mid hurts himself at USXA, and has to be medically separated, he/she can file for VA benefits after being discharged. If a cadet/mid commits a crime, he/she is punished under UCMJ. Thus, there is no legal distinction between that active duty service and that of a 10-year USMC combat veteran.

You may not "see them as AD," but Congress, DOD, and VA do. What you think is absolutely irrelevant. It's not an issue for opinion, it's clearly established by statute...SA mids/cadets, with the exception of USMMA mids, are active duty military members.


Please stop making stuff up.
 
Luigi59 said:
Which, ironically, is the only academy to place their mids into a combat zone during wartime, losing 142.
Click to expand...

Yes, well, it took Merchant Marine vets of WWII decades before they were entitled to receive VA benefits. Unfortunate.

Write your congressman:thumb:
 
All that merchant money makes up for it...

Legally cadets and midshipmen from USCGA, USMA, USNA, and USAFA are active duty.

As cadets, we were uncomfortable calling ourselves active duty, as we did nothing accept attended college. That AD also does not count towards retirement.

We refered to the "fleet" as the "Real Coast Guard". So, cadets and midshipmen are AD, but I doubt you will find many who think of themselves in that way.
 
LineInTheSand said:
That AD also does not count towards retirement.
Click to expand...

You should check on this. As I understand it - it counts AFTER retirement. You can not retire at 16 years, but when you retire at 20 -- your student time kicks in and you now have 24 years.
 
LITS,

That was my point. Yes, you are AD as cadets, but to create an illusion that it is FULL TIME AD is incorrect when comparing to AD military members.

Also, Shiner is correct.

Your SA yrs do not count towards your current pay, but when you retire those yrs count. You do have to jump throw some SMALL hoops, but it is worth it when you realize how retirement pay is calculated.

20 yrs AD 50% pay...24 yrs 60% pay. THAT is for the rest of your life. Additionally, if you go GS, it plays into the amount of leave you get day one. Bullet just converted from contractor to govt. I have told him with the amount of leave he now has we will probably get divorced if he uses it all up (40 days not including holidays), he literally could work 4 day work weeks all yr long if you add in the holidays. BTW he went govt last week, so that is what he got at the get go.

Hate to say it, but again it drives home the pt that the military does not see SA as traditional full time AD, because if the cadet was AD they would be eligible to retire at 16, since their 4 yrs were AD.
You can not retire at 16 years, but when you retire at 20
Click to expand...
. Yes, their training is 4 yrs, but it is TRAINING, not FULL TIME AD. We are parsing theories here. My point and statement was, cadets are NOT FULL TIME AD. Yes, they are AD, but they are NOT FULL TIME. That was my key response...not AD, but FULL TIME AD
 
Last edited:
shiner said:
You should check on this. As I understand it - it counts AFTER retirement. You can not retire at 16 years, but when you retire at 20 -- your student time kicks in and you now have 24 years.
Click to expand...

I have, and it was been the subject or FAR too much conversation. I can't put my finger on it now, but someone else did for me, as I was under the same impression.
 
This thread truly needs to get back on track.

The discussion of cadet's being AD is important, but it would be better for lurkers and posters if a new thread was created to address this issue, than warping this thread.

I believe threads warp because the subject has been beaten to death and it warps into a new vision. I think this is what has happened here.
 
shiner said:
You should check on this. As I understand it - it counts AFTER retirement. You can not retire at 16 years, but when you retire at 20 -- your student time kicks in and you now have 24 years.
Click to expand...
NO.

Take it from an old Colonel that has decided that 2011 is THE year of retirement.

While I have the 4 years as a cadet reflected in my AF Longevity Service Ribbon, per title 10 cadet service time is specifically NOT allowed to be used for retirement/service computation.

What that means is simply that you get a nice little ribbon for those 4 years but no other financial/career benefit.

There is ONE way you CAN use those years for federal retirement though!!! IF you become a government employee (as in Civil Service) you can "buy back" your military time...and you CAN buy back cadet time! The last time I checked (this is VERY common for Air Reserve Technicians) the cost for 4 years of cadet time was a whopping $500. However it does give 4 more years of CS time.

That's the ONLY way cadet time counts for anything other than a ribbon.

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83
 
Pima said:
LITS,

That was my point. Yes, you are AD as cadets, but to create an illusion that it is FULL TIME AD is incorrect when comparing to AD military members.
Click to expand...

There is no illusion. Cadets are active duty. It is established by statute.

In your earlier post you said, specifically, that SA mids/cadets are not active duty. You were corrected, and now you are quibbling. "Full time AD" is a term you made up.

I don't argue that LITS or other current/former SA mids/cadets may not be comfortable comparing themselves to guys in the fleet (or "Real Army/Air Force," etc);however, it nonetheless is true that they are/were active duty members. The obligations put on them with respect to not being allowed to be married, or to not facing a PCS, or to not having their school time count toward retirement are irrelevant with regard to that legal definition. Thus, your arguments support the point LITS made about not being comfortable being called an AD member, but they do not support an argument that cadets/mids are not active duty, which is what you specifically alleged in your first post on the subject.

I'm finished with this.
 
Sprog,

please look back at my first post to JAM (number 39). I stated in my opinion they were NOT full time AD. I didn't make up the term. JAM did in post 38.

I responded, that there is a difference between AD and cadets regarding the perception of Full Time AD.

This is truly parsing theories.

You served for 5 yrs and I am taking the leap that you were an AFA grad. Tell me when you received your 1st LES after graduation, did you get paid for O1 with 4 yrs service or O1 with 0 yrs? If you were an AFA grad and believe you were AD at the AFA why did the LES only give you O1 with 0?

You continually want to ignore that the DOD according to pay and benefits did not acknowledge your 4 yrs, although you state it was AD. Why would they do that? Why are they not acknowledging that a cadet is a FULL TIME AD member with all rights, benefits and privileges?

AS LITS stated, legally they are AD, but in perception from AD, they are not. If cadets, feel this way, what is the big need or deal. I simply stated my opinion that I feel stating the SA cadet is a "Full Time AD member" is incorrect to another poster. My fault is I should have kept saying "FULL TIME AD" instead of dropping "Full time" . Would you agree that SA cadets are not "FULL TIME"? A term I didn't create (post 38).

I have stated before the thread has warped and this valuable conversation is being lost to lurkers and posters. This is no longer about Fowler. Thus, either it needs to get back on track or a new thread should be created to assist parents, cadets and future cadets.

I have nothing left to state about Fowler, and honestly I am not going to get into a tit for tat fight how a cadet is perceived regarding AD or not. I will not change the oppositions mind, and they won't change mine.
 
Last edited:
Pima said:
LITS,

That was my point. Yes, you are AD as cadets, but to create an illusion that it is FULL TIME AD is incorrect when comparing to AD military members.

Also, Shiner is correct.

Your SA yrs do not count towards your current pay, but when you retire those yrs count. You do have to jump throw some SMALL hoops, but it is worth it when you realize how retirement pay is calculated.
Click to expand...
Pima: Shiner is NOT Correct. Those years count for exactly zero of your retirement pay- nor do they count for your time in service towards your military retirement eligibility. If a member of the class of 1980 retired in 2000 as a Lt Col - the years of service that his retirement is calculated on is 20 which equals 50% of base pay- each additional year above that would increase by 2-1/2% which most assuredly IS not the case in that situation. I believe that the only time this is not true would be if you were prior service enlisted, went to the prep school , left prior to graduation and went back on active duty - I believe that your time at the Academy then would count for retirement- but even then I am not 100% certain of that.
 
I talked to our friend, and he stated that the SA plays into the govt role, not retirement pay. His 4 yrs at the AFA played into his "govt" yrs. I should have figured that out because now Bullet converting from contractor to govt his AF yrs play into his bennies... i.e. why he has 40 days of leave to start with:jaw:..love him, but 8 weeks of him at home per yr :eek::bang: :bang::bang:

If you thought figuring out the military system was unique, try figuring out the govt with military experience. :bang::bang: You jump through more hoops than you do in the military to prove you are actually who you state you are. Leave it to the govt that they will not accept your military records or ID as citizenship, even as a retiree, they actually demand a birth certificate or passport:rolleyes: Insane, but that is bureaucracy at its best.
 
Last edited:
that's why people like the govenrment so much- it's always user friendly and has speedy and relevant service to offer every "customer"!:rolleyes:
 
Yep gotta love the govt, if you can figure out the pigeon hole you fit in, there is always something for you...the problem is how do you find that darn hole and how do you get the worm?:confused:
 
And this week's award for the thread to have gone most spectacularly off topic goes to...

For what its worth I think the response is pretty much what one would expect. Coherant and interesting at points without really digging into the issues in any depth. I do think VADM Fowler has definately been sadled with a lot of blame for systemic problems that were not of his creation. At the same time in that kind of job if you want to succeed i guess you have to be able to get people to buy into your vision and support your controversial decisions and he seems to have not been very able to do that.

Flemming occassionally makes interesting points but there is an icky smell of racism around much of what he writes and there is also an inconsistency in his views depending on what point he is trying to make (for example on prior enlisted Midshipmen)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I still think that the active-duty service obligation be made closer to 10 years. And yes, affirmative action is wrong :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top