ROTC cadets, recent graduates offered release from service commitments
- Thread starter T-Bone
- Start date
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
I saw this on another forum.
Did the Air Force meet the FY13 end strength?
A9. The Air Force ended FY13 slightly over end strength, but still within Congressional limits.
Q10. Is the Air Force projected to meet its end strength goal for FY14?
A10. The Air Force is currently projected to meet its congressionally mandated end strength by the end of FY14 by implementing voluntary and involuntary measures.
Q11. Does the Air Force anticipate reducing end strength in the future?
A11. Previous force management efforts are balancing end strength to authorized levels; however, future reductions may be needed to meet fiscal challenges. 3
Q12. If the Air Force reaches end strength goals for FY14, will there be Force Management-related RIFs, boards and rollbacks in FY15?
A12. Based on budget constraints and strategic goals for DoD, the Air Force expects additional force reductions will be announced for FY15 that may require additional Force Management actions. Under the performance-based personnel management strategy, the DOS Rollback program, enlisted retention boards, and Quality Force Review Boards will be enduring management tools designed to retain a high quality, high performing leaner force.
Q13. What is the AF strategy to size and shape the force?
A13. The AF uses a multi-year strategy to shape a performance-driven force leveraging voluntary programs first, incentives where needed and involuntary actions if required. Our goal is to retain key skills, maintain a high quality force, and meet accession requirements. However, the Air Force is modernizing personnel policies and institutionalizing a performance-based strategy versus today’s model that values longevity over performance.
So folks hold onto your hat because it looks like this will be occurring for another yr., which means the 300's may also see what is occurring to the 400's currently.
On that forum, it also stated they are looking to cut 25K airmen overall. That by law they cannot cut more than 30% from any AFSC.
Did the Air Force meet the FY13 end strength?
A9. The Air Force ended FY13 slightly over end strength, but still within Congressional limits.
Q10. Is the Air Force projected to meet its end strength goal for FY14?
A10. The Air Force is currently projected to meet its congressionally mandated end strength by the end of FY14 by implementing voluntary and involuntary measures.
Q11. Does the Air Force anticipate reducing end strength in the future?
A11. Previous force management efforts are balancing end strength to authorized levels; however, future reductions may be needed to meet fiscal challenges. 3
Q12. If the Air Force reaches end strength goals for FY14, will there be Force Management-related RIFs, boards and rollbacks in FY15?
A12. Based on budget constraints and strategic goals for DoD, the Air Force expects additional force reductions will be announced for FY15 that may require additional Force Management actions. Under the performance-based personnel management strategy, the DOS Rollback program, enlisted retention boards, and Quality Force Review Boards will be enduring management tools designed to retain a high quality, high performing leaner force.
Q13. What is the AF strategy to size and shape the force?
A13. The AF uses a multi-year strategy to shape a performance-driven force leveraging voluntary programs first, incentives where needed and involuntary actions if required. Our goal is to retain key skills, maintain a high quality force, and meet accession requirements. However, the Air Force is modernizing personnel policies and institutionalizing a performance-based strategy versus today’s model that values longevity over performance.
So folks hold onto your hat because it looks like this will be occurring for another yr., which means the 300's may also see what is occurring to the 400's currently.
On that forum, it also stated they are looking to cut 25K airmen overall. That by law they cannot cut more than 30% from any AFSC.
markbrown6
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2013
- Messages
- 24
putting downsize into perspective
25k from 332,854 active force equals approx. 6% overall cut. Is this right? thanks.
25k from 332,854 active force equals approx. 6% overall cut. Is this right? thanks.
I think that these stats are the latest count as of 30 September 2013 for total force:
326,775 Active Duty
64,799 Officers
261,976 Enlisted
Source: http://www.afpc.af.mil/library/airforcepersonneldemographics.asp
so a little more like 7.5% reduction in total force
326,775 Active Duty
64,799 Officers
261,976 Enlisted
Source: http://www.afpc.af.mil/library/airforcepersonneldemographics.asp
so a little more like 7.5% reduction in total force
DeskJockey
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2009
- Messages
- 78
The Army, Navy, and Marines have a relatively high percentage of “line” positions that must be filled by commissioned officers, so there is a limit to how much of a RIF they can sustain in the short-term without mothballing ships and platoons and the like. By contrast, it seems to me that the Air Force has more flexibility in its manning profile, because most of the jobs that don’t involve sitting in a cockpit or silo can be and often are performed interchangeably by uniformed, civilian, and contractor personnel. If – and I say this guardedly, because I don’t have any access to the data – the beancounters find even a small advantage in filling more non-rated slots with civilians for the next few years, there is not much that stands in their way. Don't get me wrong - I would love to hear a good argument to the contrary - but I think that AFROTC may be in for a deeper (and permanent) downsizing.
I'd say it's affecting everyone equally: http://www.army.mil/article/116900/
As far as civilians taking up some non-rated jobs in the future, not really too sure on that as they were the first to get cut during the sequestration and are getting cut for FY'14 as well.
*Also the 25k for the Air Force is not immediate but Reduction In Force for a 5 year period, while I think every other branch had their RIF plans ready during the sequestration.
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
I would also point out that although it is @ 7.5%, the reality is, for non-rated it is going to be higher than that, because as I have stated before from a fiscal/management perspective, they can take an O3 coming off their 1st op tour and throw them into maintenance for a couple of yrs.
~~~ They did this back in 93.
~ If 40% of all AFROTC grads go rated. And, if they remove all of the rated pool from the cuts, than the number will increase for the non-rated from 7.5% to maybe 9 or 10%.
~~ This also creates a problem for the cadets that are playing the game it won't be me they cut, because someone will be cut if someone doesn't say goodbye.
Ex: Bullet and the 35.
There are 2 people that work this desk at the Pentagon, 1 ADAF, 1 civ.. ADAF members transition in and out every 3 yrs., it takes them several months to get with the program process. Additionally, they need very specific personnel. I.E. fighter, weapons, and certain rank. That makes it even harder to find the person that fits into this ADAF job. Keeping a civilian allows the ADAF to do the following:
1. Manning the operational flying world.
2. Not filling a whole because it is a whole.
The ADAF colleague that worked the JOC with Bullet retired in Aug., he started his out processing in May (thus, was taking a lot of time off). The position has yet to be filled.
Cut Bullet who has been in this position since 08, you will lose not only his experience, but you also will need to make sure you can get 2 AD members at least for 1 yr out of 3. (6 months to spin up the new guy with the outgoing, and then 2 1/2 yrs later the cycle repeats). This way by keeping Bullet this does not have to occur.
Additionally if you look at the lower level GSs, such as 9, (an O1/2) it is financially cheaper to keep them than place an O1 in the position due to a benefit analysis perspective. They do not get 50% retirement pay after 20 (it is a new system now), nor commissary or "free" healthcare, plus they are not PCS'd every few yrs. Moving a member from Pope AFB to Hickham or Ramstein costs tens of thousands of dollars. If 25% of the military rotate annually that is millions of dollars saved just on PCSing.
Plus, as stated keeping civilians allows them the ability if they needed to find more money, to furlough them, thus saving more money, in essence making them take a pay cut.
I would agree with Deskjockey, for non-rated, caveat engineers, I think for the next 5 yrs it is going to be difficult.
If you look at the release group ADAF, it is for those with 3-6 yrs in., and additionally FY 13 commission, FY 14, and probably 15. The 11/12 yr commission group is not being hit right now because if their AFSC had even a 3-6 mos. training school, than a PCS, they are trying to re-coup their cost, come next yr. Remember it can take 6-9 months before they report. Add it together, a 12 grad, might right now have 9 months on the job at their 1st op base, even though they commissioned 18 months ago.
You may see come next yr., for FY 15, the commission 11 yr group being targeted just as much as the 15 yr group.
Powesr45,
I had thought that I read before that the Army was taking the highest hit.
I would think for the Army it will be even harder since for ROTC grads in the AF, there is no Guard or Reserve option. Thus, for many AFROTC grads they can apply to join a guard unit and still stay in their AFSC.
A friend of ours back in the early 90's washed out of UPT. The AF released them. He went to his ANG unit, and they picked him up to be a Nav. They sent him to Nav school, and he spent the next few yrs full time Guard, just like some AROTC grads.
We will be seeing many of the AFROTC 13 and 14 grads now looking into Guard units. It is still common for this to occur. Our DS has 4 Guard UPT students in his class. They knew walking in April 13 what airframe they would get when they wing in April 14, unlike the AFA/AFROTC students.
The problem will be there are only so many positions, and as they fill up, that option will also disappear too.
~~~ They did this back in 93.
~ If 40% of all AFROTC grads go rated. And, if they remove all of the rated pool from the cuts, than the number will increase for the non-rated from 7.5% to maybe 9 or 10%.
~~ This also creates a problem for the cadets that are playing the game it won't be me they cut, because someone will be cut if someone doesn't say goodbye.
As far as civilians go, there is a problem with the premise that to reduce the budget they cut them and fill the positions with ADAF members. Many of them are hired to make sure there is a consistency within the depts.Powers45 said:
Ex: Bullet and the 35.
There are 2 people that work this desk at the Pentagon, 1 ADAF, 1 civ.. ADAF members transition in and out every 3 yrs., it takes them several months to get with the program process. Additionally, they need very specific personnel. I.E. fighter, weapons, and certain rank. That makes it even harder to find the person that fits into this ADAF job. Keeping a civilian allows the ADAF to do the following:
1. Manning the operational flying world.
2. Not filling a whole because it is a whole.
The ADAF colleague that worked the JOC with Bullet retired in Aug., he started his out processing in May (thus, was taking a lot of time off). The position has yet to be filled.
Cut Bullet who has been in this position since 08, you will lose not only his experience, but you also will need to make sure you can get 2 AD members at least for 1 yr out of 3. (6 months to spin up the new guy with the outgoing, and then 2 1/2 yrs later the cycle repeats). This way by keeping Bullet this does not have to occur.
Additionally if you look at the lower level GSs, such as 9, (an O1/2) it is financially cheaper to keep them than place an O1 in the position due to a benefit analysis perspective. They do not get 50% retirement pay after 20 (it is a new system now), nor commissary or "free" healthcare, plus they are not PCS'd every few yrs. Moving a member from Pope AFB to Hickham or Ramstein costs tens of thousands of dollars. If 25% of the military rotate annually that is millions of dollars saved just on PCSing.
Plus, as stated keeping civilians allows them the ability if they needed to find more money, to furlough them, thus saving more money, in essence making them take a pay cut.
I would agree with Deskjockey, for non-rated, caveat engineers, I think for the next 5 yrs it is going to be difficult.
If you look at the release group ADAF, it is for those with 3-6 yrs in., and additionally FY 13 commission, FY 14, and probably 15. The 11/12 yr commission group is not being hit right now because if their AFSC had even a 3-6 mos. training school, than a PCS, they are trying to re-coup their cost, come next yr. Remember it can take 6-9 months before they report. Add it together, a 12 grad, might right now have 9 months on the job at their 1st op base, even though they commissioned 18 months ago.
You may see come next yr., for FY 15, the commission 11 yr group being targeted just as much as the 15 yr group.
Powesr45,
I had thought that I read before that the Army was taking the highest hit.
I would think for the Army it will be even harder since for ROTC grads in the AF, there is no Guard or Reserve option. Thus, for many AFROTC grads they can apply to join a guard unit and still stay in their AFSC.
A friend of ours back in the early 90's washed out of UPT. The AF released them. He went to his ANG unit, and they picked him up to be a Nav. They sent him to Nav school, and he spent the next few yrs full time Guard, just like some AROTC grads.
We will be seeing many of the AFROTC 13 and 14 grads now looking into Guard units. It is still common for this to occur. Our DS has 4 Guard UPT students in his class. They knew walking in April 13 what airframe they would get when they wing in April 14, unlike the AFA/AFROTC students.
The problem will be there are only so many positions, and as they fill up, that option will also disappear too.
Last edited:
Here is a good article on the AF times (Dec. 16, 2013). Does not necessarily pertain to AFROTC but still interesting to see what is going on in a broader perspective.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/articl...ders-push-voluntary-exits-trim-force-by-1-900
I did find this interesting... as I dug up the most recent AFPC number of ADAF as 326,775 and markbrown6 332,854... yet the article stats the end goal for FY14 is: "The resulting end strength of 327,600 would match the administration’s proposed 2014 budget." (1900 person cut, meaning the actual current number is 329,500 ADAF?)
Does anyone know how many people are in the Active Duty U.S. Air Force
haha.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/articl...ders-push-voluntary-exits-trim-force-by-1-900
I did find this interesting... as I dug up the most recent AFPC number of ADAF as 326,775 and markbrown6 332,854... yet the article stats the end goal for FY14 is: "The resulting end strength of 327,600 would match the administration’s proposed 2014 budget." (1900 person cut, meaning the actual current number is 329,500 ADAF?)
Does anyone know how many people are in the Active Duty U.S. Air Force
haha.
Pima
10-Year Member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Messages
- 13,900
Powers,
Your link doesn't work unless you are a subscriber, except for the opening paragraph.
That being said, I am not sure I bite off on their opening statement about the biggest since the Cold War. I clearly recall the 90's and some yr groups that were ROTC grads were cut by 95%. This included fliers. I recall when it was occurring one of the Lt. Cols. said at least they were handling it better than in the late 70s. He said one day after they finished de-briefing a guy was called into the Commander's office and handed them their walking papers. It was that short notice.
That being said, it doesn't really matter if it is or not the largest because the impact on that person's life is still going to feel the same.
I really will be surprised if they make their numbers without RIFs occurring. Looking at the posters here from an anecdotal position, they are saying nobody is volunteering to leave. If you do the math, they are going to have to cut. I would think those that commission in 13 and have yet to report, will have a very high probability of being given walking papers. When I say high, I mean closer to 100% than to 50/50 chance.
I am not sure how ROTC grads add into the equation for end of yr strength. For example, although they commissioned in May/June 2103, many will not report until FY 14. The question is did AFPC include them in the FY13 number or 14? That can be the discrepancy. The same can be said for kids enlisting in HS. They may enlist in Oct., but let's say they don't report for a full yr. Are they FY 13 or 14. Than you have people that retire. They may place their papers in Jan 13., and retire Dec. 13, two different yr groups. Or how about Palace Chase?
My pure guess is that depending on the source, you could find a lot of different numbers depending on how they use the numbers.
Your link doesn't work unless you are a subscriber, except for the opening paragraph.
That being said, I am not sure I bite off on their opening statement about the biggest since the Cold War. I clearly recall the 90's and some yr groups that were ROTC grads were cut by 95%. This included fliers. I recall when it was occurring one of the Lt. Cols. said at least they were handling it better than in the late 70s. He said one day after they finished de-briefing a guy was called into the Commander's office and handed them their walking papers. It was that short notice.
That being said, it doesn't really matter if it is or not the largest because the impact on that person's life is still going to feel the same.
I really will be surprised if they make their numbers without RIFs occurring. Looking at the posters here from an anecdotal position, they are saying nobody is volunteering to leave. If you do the math, they are going to have to cut. I would think those that commission in 13 and have yet to report, will have a very high probability of being given walking papers. When I say high, I mean closer to 100% than to 50/50 chance.
I am not sure how ROTC grads add into the equation for end of yr strength. For example, although they commissioned in May/June 2103, many will not report until FY 14. The question is did AFPC include them in the FY13 number or 14? That can be the discrepancy. The same can be said for kids enlisting in HS. They may enlist in Oct., but let's say they don't report for a full yr. Are they FY 13 or 14. Than you have people that retire. They may place their papers in Jan 13., and retire Dec. 13, two different yr groups. Or how about Palace Chase?
My pure guess is that depending on the source, you could find a lot of different numbers depending on how they use the numbers.
Last edited:
oops, sorry Pima! If anyone wants to read the full article type: "Leaders push voluntary exits to trim force" into Google not sure why the embedded link does not work!
FlyingWildcatDad
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2012
- Messages
- 325
Wish I knew how to post the link, but there is a new article in the Air Force Times today titled "Lists show who's eligible and in eligible for early retirement " that goes along with this thread. Maybe someone that's more computer savy than myself can post the link. The article definitely shows the direction the AF is heading.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 15,994
FlyingWildcatDad
5-Year Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2012
- Messages
- 325
Thanks kinnem
Somewhat off topic and not intended to hijack the tread.....
Why does the AF feel the need to have RPA pilots officers? My extremely limited understanding is that they are not in a traditional pilot role. Could these roles be assumed by enlisted airmen thereby reducing the overall cost of having to pay an officer to do it? I'm sure every service has slots/jobs that could be filled with a highly trained and professional enlisted person instead of an officer. Seems like it would reduce a fair amount of payroll and future pension costs.
Why does the AF feel the need to have RPA pilots officers? My extremely limited understanding is that they are not in a traditional pilot role. Could these roles be assumed by enlisted airmen thereby reducing the overall cost of having to pay an officer to do it? I'm sure every service has slots/jobs that could be filled with a highly trained and professional enlisted person instead of an officer. Seems like it would reduce a fair amount of payroll and future pension costs.
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 15,994
No. Certainly not that my son has heard or that I am aware of. Have seen nothing in the press either. They are planning on reducing the forces though. I would expect, if they plan well enough, they can address it through not granting Advanced Standing to the appropriate number of college programmers. That's certainly how they handled required reductions in nursing numbers last year.
EDIT: BTW, I know of two sophomore college programmers in good standing who recently left the NROTC program. The Navy option moved over to Army ROTC. The Marine Option dropped and has a PLC contract. I have no knowledge of what their Navy advisers may have been telling them but I suspect difficulty in obtaining advanced standing (unrelated to their performance) may have been a key factor. It's just my surmise though. USMC could also reduce the number of 2 LTs by getting a little more demanding at OCS and thin the herd that way.
EDIT: BTW, I know of two sophomore college programmers in good standing who recently left the NROTC program. The Navy option moved over to Army ROTC. The Marine Option dropped and has a PLC contract. I have no knowledge of what their Navy advisers may have been telling them but I suspect difficulty in obtaining advanced standing (unrelated to their performance) may have been a key factor. It's just my surmise though. USMC could also reduce the number of 2 LTs by getting a little more demanding at OCS and thin the herd that way.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2012
- Messages
- 808
Likewise, I haven't heard anything yet on the Army side. I do know that the Army is planing on downscaling - we are dropping I believe 12 brigades from the Army over the next 10 years - I think that article said that comes down to 100,000 troops. ROTC-wise, don't know how this affects us in the years to come, but I do know that the Army is slashing more and more AD slots, pushing more into the Reserves/Guard. As far as I know, no one from ROTC is being cut - just more being pushed into the reserve components.
I've always wondered the same as well. Although the Army certainly doesn't use such drones as the MQ-1, RQ-4, or MQ-9, drone operators are enlisted for Army. But, I'm sure someone at the top had a very, very good reason.
Last edited: