Hi. Just curious as to how this works... If a cadet selects a branch with a high likelihood of being branch detailed (such as MI) do they get any say in whether they are willing to be branch detailed. In other words can they put for example MI down as a top choice for branch preference but state that they don’t want MI if it means being branch detailed? Thanks
Accessions and branch detailing
- Thread starter gill0610
- Start date
emwvmi01
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2012
- Messages
- 281
I am nearly 99% sure the answer is no. More importantly, your DS would miss out on a great developmental opportunity with Branch Detailing to gain some additional Army experience before moving into MI. All your DS branching should be caveated with he is serving at the needs of the Army and the endstate is the honor of leading American Soldiers regardless of branch/MOS.
Thanks. I was just using MI as an example and understand the needs of the Army. As of now he is only planning to serve 4 years so was hoping to do so in a branch that really interests him. (His first choice will actually be Engineer). I get the benefits of doing something else first if you plan to be career army, but not sure it’s as relevant if that isn’t your plan. I’d be interested to hear different points of view on that also. Thanks for the input.
My favorite quote from a eulogy at a Jewish funereal, "Man makes plans and God laughs."
Based on my DS' experience, I'd advise against going in trying to curate ones's path in order to engineer an exit 4 or 5 years hence--especially before one even enters the path. That could be a recipe for disaster for your son AND for his soldiers. There are numerous elements, beyond his control that can enhance or ruin his experience.
Most people who knew my DS couldn't believe he would join, much less go the distance with ROTC. He was always very mercenary about it--almost exactly as you describe your son's MO. He assumed that he would exit after 4 years with no debt and go work for 3M or Dow or return to school for an advanced degree in Chemistry, which the Military would pay for. When it came time to branch, he took on an extra year's commitment in order to branch Signal. Why? Because they were the most laid back, their work was interesting to him and he stood the best chance of deploying OCONUS for his first duty station. So then it became a 5 year commit, but this route added ATT and Verizon to the mix of post military employment options.
On that deployment he worked closely with another branch and found what they did very interesting and began to think, "I could see doing that for a couple of years." He got the transfer by request, loved what he was doing and then his mantra became, "I am going to stay in until it isn't fun anymore."
He continued to progress and just tacked on another 3 years to his initial commitment. None of those options for employment or education are off the table. Delayed? Yes, but not lost and he added a few more options. When the time comes to execute those plans, He will be a better qualified and more mature candidate. Or he may stay in if they want him.
I kind of remember being where you are, thinking "How is he going to apply his Chem education in the Army?" The Army is a big place which offers amazing opportunities to those who know how to earn them and grasp them when they arise. There are also very few civilian jobs that heap more responsibility more quickly onto the shoulders of a fresh face college graduate than the US military.
Wish him the best of luck!
k2rider
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 719
Great post cb7893....my son in law has done something similar although I think he always knew he may be a lifer. He is in an assignment that has provided opportunities for training that included added commitments upon completion. On the last one, he had to commit to an add'l 5 years but he loves what he's doing so it's not too difficult and his assignment precludes him from being sent to many far off lands where *most* people don't want to go. He just recently promoted to Major and while still a ways off, he can see the light at the end of the tunnel.
Thanks for both of your inputs. He has a strong desire to serve and was planning to join ROTC even if he hadn’t received a scholarship. It was never about the money to him. He just only wants to commit 4 years or so at this point. I personally think the Army might be a good fit for him and he could decide to do more than the minimum 4 years. But of course that will be his choice and will depend in part on how happy he is in the branch he is assigned to.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 16,005
One only commits for one period of time, at a time. He doesn't even need to think or worry about the next three years until he's close to done with his first commitment. An elephant is eaten one bite at a time. DS takes it from commitment to commitment. He has a plan for the next commitment but that doesn't mean he's committed to it in his own mind yet (although I think he'd be disappointed if he couldn't pull his plan off).
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 808
Be careful with that; this is something to think about. If he's thinking about only doing 4 years - there's really no point in branch detailing, because by that time you get to that second branch, you're out of the Army (or so you desire). Furthermore, unless he's interested in a combat arms branch (for the most part), that could potentially be a bad move; since he'd spend his entire Army time doing stuff he wouldn't like. This could lead to a miserable quality of life, etc.
I wouldn't necessarily say one should go out of their way to branch detail for the sake of it, just because you're interested in career Army. Sure, getting different experiences is great; broadening your skillset, experiences and all. And sure you could be SC, branch detailed IN; and that probably helps when you're operating at the tactical level. But then look when you're at the field grade level or higher; having that experience as a IN PL isn't quite as relevant anymore. That's just one piece of the puzzle; now you're looking at the operation and stragetic level. You're not concerned with just that IN unit. Now you're looking at Unified Land Operations; potentially integrating (Combined Arms) combat arms units: AR, AV, FA, ADA, etc. But don't forget you need your sustainers too: AG, SC, OD, QM, etc. Now lets take a step further and talk about Multi-Domain Operations. Now we're talking about interfacing with USAF, USN, USMC, cyberspace ... and soon to be Space Force.
Don't fret over this too much. As kinnem said, just take it one step at a time; he's got time.
Just some food for thought.
I don't know the details about the sort of conditional branch requests you are hypothesizing, but I can tell you that the Army releases data every year on branching/accessions. I recently posted it in another thread. If you drill down, you can get a pretty good idea what your odds are of being detailed from any given branch. If he wants to avoid being detailed, I'd approach branch selection from that perspective. Well, that, or be near the top of the OML, in which case I suspect detailing becomes less common (although, again, I don't know that for sure).
That was kind of my point. Since at this point he is only planning 4 years branch detailing didnt seem like a good option
It appears that Signal donates a fair number and Engineers considerably less.
I don't know how competitive they are. I can tell you that Signal is considered very unsexy. It isn't combat arms and isn't seen as a route to a 25 year Army Officer career. The BOLC is heavy with Math and Computer/Data networks. In general, the branch tends to attract enlisted soldiers who score better on the ASVAB, many with college degrees. They see it as a route for collecting Network Certifications and resume building for the civilian world. I can't speak for the officer Corps, but according to my DS they also have their eyes on positions at the telecoms. He had no long term interest in Signal, but he did well and used it as a jumping off point to change branches.
I don't know how competitive they are. I can tell you that Signal is considered very unsexy. It isn't combat arms and isn't seen as a route to a 25 year Army Officer career. The BOLC is heavy with Math and Computer/Data networks. In general, the branch tends to attract enlisted soldiers who score better on the ASVAB, many with college degrees. They see it as a route for collecting Network Certifications and resume building for the civilian world. I can't speak for the officer Corps, but according to my DS they also have their eyes on positions at the telecoms. He had no long term interest in Signal, but he did well and used it as a jumping off point to change branches.