USAFA Cadets Being Affected by Budget Cuts

[eagle36]

the 2LTs here at AFIT have meetings every so often, and last week we met with the Commandant here to let him share some of his knowledge with us. One of the things he talked about regarding budget costs was the presence of students at AFIT. He said while it won't go away completely, they are actively seeking ways to "bring AFIT to the students" instead of "bringing the students to AFIT".

For the class of 2010, there were far more students sent here than 2009 received. i don't have the exact number but between AAP and GSP slots, i believe there are about 35 or so of us here. I'm fairly certain one of the '09 grads here right now said that's compared to only about 15-20 for them. It'll continue to fluctuate, just as do pilot slots and members in the AF. When the economy booms again, we'll see a rush of ppl getting out, and then the AF will spend money trying to get more people. It's just the way the world turns

 

[Pima]

When the economy booms again, we'll see a rush of ppl getting out, and then the AF will spend money trying to get more people. It's just the way the world turns

That is the truth...go back and look went RIFs occurred in yrs past, it always has been tied to the economy.

 

[agolson]

Can anyone answer why the other Academies are not mentioning budget cuts? I have appointments to three of the Academies and am down to making my final decision. You are all so knowledgable about the AFA, are these budget issues concerning enough to re-consider AFA as my first choice?

I think he is asking if the other services have as many RIF's historically as the Air Force. This young person has an opportunity to attend any of the big three academies. I think this is a valid question.

 

[Bullet]

I think he is asking if the other services have as many RIF's historically as the Air Force. This young person has an opportunity to attend any of the big three academies. I think this is a valid question.

You're absolutley correct, it is a very valid question.

The answer is YES. Simply take a look at active duty strength reductions each service went through during the early 90s. EVERY service was hit, and hit hard.

There is a perfect storm of pressures on troop strength just on the horizon, all impacting the number of troops the US military will need during the next five years. We're currently involved in two large scale conflicts, but the call to reduce force strength in those campaigns grows louder every day. So, the required troop strength will decrease. The US is facing tremendous pressure to reduce and balance it's budget, with the Defense budget a primary target for reduction, and calls to reduce the size of the US military also gaining strength daily in the halls of Congress. So, the required troop strength will decrease. The economy is still recovering, and college tuition is still rising. Many students and parents who thought they had sufficient means to pay for school are now looking for help through scholarships, and with so many more looking for those scholarships the competition for one is rising. Finally, with such a bad job market out there, more and more persons currently serving are deciding to stay rather than get out at the end of their commitments. Retention is at it's highest levels in decades. So, the need for replacements to maintain the required troop strength will decrease.

Please don't take this as a "chicken little" horror story. And sorry otbe the bearer of bad news; just passing the obvious. It WILL be tougher to get in to into ALL of the services, even tougher to have them pay for your tuition or select you for an Academy slot. Many of the junior troops may even face a RIF in the future. And perhaps in a few years those promotion rates will drop as well, and those not selected will be shown the door (i.e. making Major perhaps will no longer be a "pretty much no contest" anymore for those who stay that far; perhaps even "making Capt."

Like was said before: "timing is everything". Also said before: "the pendulum swings both ways", so things may improve.

Now, rather than just continuing in admiration of the turd, I'll tell you how to fix the toilet. Make yourself RIF-resistant by making yourself the best candidate, student, officer in the pack. Work your tail off, study harder than everyone else, dedicate yourself to being the best, and make yourself too valuable NOT to keep. And if you haven't made it even then? Well, at least you know you gave it your best and can't ask that inevitable question: "could I have tried harder and done more?"

(Advise coming from a person who survived the biggest RIF since the end of Vietnam)...

 

[patentesq]

I think he is asking if the other services have as many RIF's historically as the Air Force. This young person has an opportunity to attend any of the big three academies. I think this is a valid question.

I don't think anyone is saying it's an invalid question. I think Bruno's point was that in the military, all boats rise and fall with the tide. But folks shouldn't based their decisions about service selection on something that is wholly speculative and cyclical. That decision has to be what the candidate prefers to do as a service member. For many, the choice is clear (i.e., if you want submarines, go Navy; if you want satellites, go Air Force; if you want Infantry, go Army). But for others, it is less clear (i.e., if you want to pursue a career in the Finance Corps or Medical Corps, the distinction among the services is less clear because the jobs are similar in each service).

Generally, the tides of change ebb and flow fairly evenly among each of the services (depending upon current, real-world threats to our nation). The DoD receives a mandate from Congress to reduce costs (particular acute right now). At a fairly high level, the individual services then find out from Secretary Gates and his staff how much they can spend after wrangling and elbowing among the various services. When the dust settles, each of the services then have to turn to their individual staffs to figure out how to stick within the parameters set by DoD. Each service has its own budget folks who work on this, and the decisionmaking process is slower sometimes in one service than another.

Eventually, the decision of how to cut trickles down to the service academy for each individual branch of service. Some of the academies will receive instructions sooner than the others (there is no single authority over all of the service academies). If the Air Force happens to proceed with cuts faster, that does not mean that the Army and Navy are far behind. In short, I would expect to hear something similar from the other academies in the coming weeks/months.

At least that's how I understand it.

 

[bruno]

Patentesq said it pretty well! I guess from my perspective- you can't game these things. Typically everybody will be affected by budget cuts although the timing and scope may be a little different. Trying to figure out today who will be the most affected in a few years is a fools game pretty much akin to figuring out where the ball will fall on a roulette wheel. Today a program or a service will be relatively hot, tomorrow, same service will be down and someone else will be up. You really just have to decide what service you want and ride the wave- as nobody can give you an absolute answer on what the AF, Navy or Army will look like by the time you are gonna be joining it. If the Air Force is really what you have your heart set on- then make the commitment and hang on.
As far as the question- do the other services go thru this? Well - in 1990 the US Army had 800,000 soldiers. In 1999 it had 489,000 soldiers on active duty- yet in 2005 they were pushing to add 65,000 soldiers to the Army end strength and about 25,000 more marines. The US Navy had close to 600 ships in 1990 - what does it have now- 290? Things Change, priorities change and reality changes - sometimes quickly, but unless you have a chrystal ball between your shoulders you probably won't be able to predict what the future will look like. There are no guarantees in the military. The Air Force isn't going to disappear anymore than the rest of the services- If you want to go into the AF, then USAFA should be your number one choice and don't sweat the budget.

 

[DevilDog]

My son told me tonite that they are disenrolling students with less that a 2.3 GPA. He said they have too many students and they want to get it down by about 800. Has anyone else heard this? Could this just be scuttlebutt, or could it be true?

 

[marciemi]

May be scuttlebutt, or at least the "facts" getting diluted through too many different channels. My son said something similar, but that they told them 400 current cadets, but he said reducing by that number by 2012 from mostly the classes of 2013 and 2014. He said they were told that they were going to be a lot stricter on the Ac Pro side (ie most of the cuts would come from academics) and that they would also be looking at the "2.0 and go" folks and possibly even cutting some very close to that cutoff. I'd think a 2.3 would be far enough away to be safe, but who can say these days?!

 

[flieger83]

I would be VERY surprised to see any cadet dropped with over a 2.00 GPA because by definition a 2.00 is "In Good Academic standing." It would be very difficult to justify dropping anyone with that. I could see legal challenges there.

NOW...take that 2.30 and get an "F" in a "core" course...or any course for that matter, and the situation changes.

But "just for being in the 2.00 - 2.30 range...nope, I'm not buying it.

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83

 

[raimius]

Yeah, on the 2.3 disenrollments.
2.3 is in "good standing" and the requirement for getting a car on base during junior year.

 

[patentesq]

I don't understand how the Air Force saves any appreciable amount of money by cutting class size. If they empty out some of the bunks, do they then rent out the rooms to local civilians? Or is this really about cutting the size of the graduating class, so you have fewer folks in the pipeline? If the latter is the case, then why not just deny active duty to a certain percentage of grads? Or is active duty upon graduation a sacred guaranty provided by statute/regulation?

 

[flieger83]

One of the things I don't think has been addressed too much...

There's a legal limit to the size of the cadet wing...

And the "overcrowding" in cadet rooms is a real pain. You do NOT want to have 3 to a room...EVER. I had that as a doolie for one semester...it's NOT good.

Steve
USAFA ALO
USAFA '83

***or maybe I missed this in earlier posts??***

 

[LineInTheSand]

We used to say (granted different academy)... "2.0....good to go".

 

[lonewolf210]

I don't understand how the Air Force saves any appreciable amount of money by cutting class size. If they empty out some of the bunks, do they then rent out the rooms to local civilians? Or is this really about cutting the size of the graduating class, so you have fewer folks in the pipeline? If the latter is the case, then why not just deny active duty to a certain percentage of grads? Or is active duty upon graduation a sacred guaranty provided by statute/regulation?

As flieger pointed out the real issue is that the academy is currently over it's legal limits of cadets and as such is cutting incoming class sizes and dis-enrolling more cadets than they have in the past

 

[Pima]

Or is this really about cutting the size of the graduating class, so you have fewer folks in the pipeline?

Fewer in the pipeline are needed because the DOD budget will be cut. Manpower issues, by keeping them in the pipeline they risk a RIF, which costs a lot of money...they will get a separation pay check if they are RIF, and if they take the VSP (voluntarily leave) the paycheck is even bigger...big time bigger. Now they pd 400K to educate them and have to pay for them to leave. Economically that is not wise.

If the latter is the case, then why not just deny active duty to a certain percentage of grads?

Because it costs 400K per cadet to educate them from taxpayer money...hard to sell that to the American public, when even a Harvard degree doesn't cost that much.

Or is active duty upon graduation a sacred guaranty provided by statute/regulation?

Again, why invest 400K if you are not going to get a return on your investment? Like it or not they are an investment.

I think from a personal POV they also learned from the 92/93 RIF. They really were caught blindsided by the depth of how hard they had to cut the troop strength and they do not want to do that again. To me this is about getting ahead of the 8 ball.

Anyone who has listened or paid attention to economic news, the outlook for 5 yrs regarding employment is not good. Even with our job growth rate, they are saying it will take 10 yrs at this rate to get back to a 6.0 unemployment rate. The military understands when the economy tightens retention rate is high, thus, they have to plan that members will not be doing the 5 and dive at the traditional rate, but one much lower. At the same time, due to the economy they will not have money to support this level of recruitment based on govt budgetary reasons.

The AF has been showing signs of this coming for about 18 months. Unfortunately, many posters only want SA, thus they never poked their cranium on the ROTC/OCS/OTC thread.

Had they done that, they would have seen that the warning signs were there...
1. OCS was canceled last yr for the July board
2. ROTC scholarships were fewer and Type 1 was very competitive.
3. SFT for AFROTC cadets were cut.
~~~ % were drastically cut
~~~ TY there will be no Maxwell 6
4. AFROTC cadets were given their walking papers due to gpa's...2.8-3.0 were cut. Some were 3 months prior to graduation, some were sophomores on scholarship.

The AF has, rightfully so, cut OCS and ROTC to the bone, but eventually if you need to still cut, and there is nothing left there you have to go elsewhere that will not impact AD. That only leaves one place...the AFA. It is a cost benefit analysis.

As for the other branches regarding if this is only the AF, I would suggest you do check out the ROTC site...the signs are there that the Navy and Army are right behind them....look at scholarships.

This would also mimic 92/93 RIF. AF did it 1st, but within a yr or so the Navy did it and so did the Army.

 

[Christcorp]

I don't understand how the Air Force saves any appreciable amount of money by cutting class size. If they empty out some of the bunks, do they then rent out the rooms to local civilians? Or is this really about cutting the size of the graduating class, so you have fewer folks in the pipeline? If the latter is the case, then why not just deny active duty to a certain percentage of grads? Or is active duty upon graduation a sacred guaranty provided by statute/regulation?

Can't say I really understand your point. Granted, cutting class size initially only saves the air force in food, medical, some pay, etc... But your alternative of "Deny active duty to a certain percentage of grads"; loses me. Are you saying to simply give college educations to individuals for free? No payback required? Or do you assume that all the guard squadrons aren't cutting back, and will take all these newly commissioned officers. Obviously, cutting back on cadets, is to ultimately cut back on the active force. But I am confused about the "Active duty upon graduation" comments you are making. What else is the purpose of the academy, other than to prepare an individual for active duty. We aren't an education/diploma mill. We don't just give out free educations. And we aren't educating individuals for the guard. What else would we be educating individuals for, if not for active duty???

 

[Pima]

CC for the Army ROTC they are not like AFROTC where every ROTC cadet goes AD. AROTC cadets actually get three paths to choose from:

AD
Reserves
Guard

Hence, anyone who is looking at every SA and every ROTC program would ask why not have those options available for the SA?

Of course, to me, the question still comes down to the ROI. 400K is a big investment. 1000 cadets X 400K = 400,000,000 per class. That is a lot of money...sorry, but what if 50% bolted? Basically that would be 200,000,000 flushed away. As a tax payer before you hit my tax deductions, I would be mad to know we, as taxpayers gave a free education, while I have kids on student payment plans and loans.

By opening the door to let them walk or do Reserves/Guard will open the door where the SA's can't assess future Man power needs.

The military does strategic planning like any corporation. The more of the options that exist, the harder to plan strategically. The bigger the organization, such as DOD, the harder it becomes to plot their future needs.

People believe or want to believe that the military is not a fiscally driven organization. They are incorrect, and in essence believing in a fallacy. The military has budget constraints just like IBM or Microsoft. When there is an inequity of incoming and outgoing in a negative cash flow, they will re-adjust to bring equilibrium to the cash flow.

That is where the AF is at currently. Their cash flow is negative, and they need to cut personnel.

The AF is Microsoft, and has decided this is their strategic plan...not offering Reserve or Guard.

The Army is Apple and has decided that their strategic plan, at least for ROTC is offering Reserve and Guard as their option.

The Navy is IBM and has decided that their strategic plan, at least for ROTC will mimic AF, and offer less scholarships while requiring all to go AD.

That is how people need to view each service. Yes, they are all under the umbrella for DOD, but it is de-centralized and they all get to do what is best for their company.

 

[Just_A_Mom]

One of the things I don't think has been addressed too much...

There's a legal limit to the size of the cadet wing...

I have made this point a few times in relation to the AFA.
Neither Navy nor West Point are over their legal limit of 4400.
The expansion was in 2003-2004 from 4000 to 4400 in response to the war. (Nothing to do with 'good/bad' economy)
Now that we are drawing down troops overseas it would only make sense to draw back from 4400 to 4000.
Incidentally, West Point never got to 4400. Last year was the first year they graduated over 1000.

By law Service Academy grads must commission Active Duty. This is, after all, their purpose.
Pima is correct there are three different ways to commission out of Army ROTC - however they do not always get to "choose".
Some AROTC cadets who joined ROTC to commission AD are finding out they will be commissioning into the Guard or Reserves. That "promise" of a full time job after graduation is not a reality in some cases.

 

[Pima]

JAM,

Thank you for the clarification

Some AROTC cadets who joined ROTC to commission AD are finding out they will be commissioning into the Guard or Reserves. That "promise" of a full time job after graduation is not a reality in some cases.

Your response also illustrates what I was stating before...

The Army also is showing the signs of how the military budget is impacting every branch.

10 yrs ago, I bet everyone got AD in the AROTC world who desired it, but now that is no longer the case.

Before any branch hits their SA, they will try to take the easier route and that is OTS and ROTC.

I believe it was Clarkson or Marist on the AROTC side who stated that their schools will get @ 50% less scholarships this yr than from previous yrs.

That goes back to Kat and Agolson asking about why take the chance with the AF?

Basically the answer is they are not the only ones that will be spreading the pain...their sister services will be too.

To understand why the AF is going through this now, or before the other branches, you must understand the AD military world.

The AF traditionally is First In, First Out. Their op tempo mission ends before the Navy and the Army. The AF still has combat missions in the sand box, but nothing like it was in 02/03/04. The Army and the Marines (Navy) are still there in bulk numbers, yet as we withdraw out of Iraq and Afghanistan, there will be too many of them. Thus, they will be the AF regarding manpower needs.

Throw in the economy, and it won't be pretty...IMPO especially for the Army since they are so large in size compared to sister services. The release of these soldiers via RIF, SERB, or VSP will ripple down into our economy.

Again, look back at 92-94. The unemployment rate at that time was @7%, we are at 9.5%.

If we do not get a handle on the amount of our military in the pipeline, economically we can hurt our country.

The military is just trying not to repeat the 92-94 RIF by slowing the pipeline of future officers.

Also, it is important to understand how the promotion system works.

Flag (Gens) to Field (O4-O6) to Company (O1-O3) must be in a proportional percentage. Officers to Enlisted also must be in a proportional percentage.

We are really getting into nitty gritty here, it is diverting the thread, but I believe for posters to understand why this occurring, they need to understand that the AFA does not live in a bubble; the AF impacts the AFA; the DOD impacts the AF; the economy and military conflict impact the DOD.

When you can see the big picture of how it trickles down, you get why this is happening.

 

[patentesq]

Are you saying to simply give college educations to individuals for free? No payback required?

I recall from my own experience in 1990. When the Soviet Union started to crumble in 1989, I reluctantly decided to leave the Army when my service obligation was up in August 1990 and go to law school. A lot of us at the O'Club were reaching that decision at the time, because no one really believed then that we would get the order to "lock and load" anytime soon, perhaps not ever in our lifetimes. Congress was demanding a major "peace dividend."

My original service obligation was 4 years AD, 2 years Reserves, and 2 years IRR. And after I had mentally prepared to serve in the Reserves during law school (I really needed the extra money), the Army announced a major RIF because of the reduced Soviet threat and decided to release ROTC scholarship students from their service obligations and basically told everyone that they didn't need to fulfill their end of the bargain. For many, it was a TOTAL windfall, but I didn't see it that way because of my financial situation at the time. At that point, I had to fight REALLY HARD to gain entrance into the Reserves and was one of only 2 officers in the entire United States Army (according to the Army Times) that summer who somehow managed to transition from active duty to the Reserves.

One week after I outprocessed at Ft. Dix, Saddam Hussein decided to invade Kuwait and my entire former AD unit was ordered to deploy. The situation had changed. Timing is everything.

The point I was really trying to make is that the military makes certain economic judgments during a major RIF, such as the one we are about to experience (corporations do this as well whenever they announce massive layoffs; they often agree to provide generous severance packages for which there is no prior obligation in order to reduce headcount). I totally understand the point about reducing the entering class size at USAFA based on a projected pipeline calling for fewer officers and not giving those folks a free, pricey education. But what about the cadets who are in their second or third year? Why not just say something like,

"Alright, we're in an imperfect situation right now with Congress demanding that we cut costs, and we're willing to let you folks finish up your final year or so, because it really doesn't cost us that much after all of the investment we've already poured into you. This way, if we find ourselves in the unfortunate circumstance of having to invade Iran over its nuclear program or if North Korea decides to do something weird like invade its cousin, you'll still be in the "system" for us to draw upon if we have to make an unexpected 180-degree turn in a year or so. The deal is, however, if we release you to IRR and we need you, you're back on active duty immediately helping lead the new Airmen that are called up. Active duty slots are going to be competitive from now on, like those folks in AROTC are doing, and any USAFA cadet with a GPA under, say, 2.5 will be involuntarily placed into the IRR upon graduation and won't get that coveted AD slot."

However, the point that flieger83, lonewolf210, and Just_A_Mom have made about USAFA exceeding its statutory class-size limits TOTALLY changes the analysis. I was mistakenly under the impression that these USAFA cuts to the class size were economic-based, NOT based on incorrect prior assumptions made by USAFA admin folks about the normal level of attrition at USAFA or having to "bulk up" during a period of war. If the cuts at USAFA are non-economic, then #27 is arguably off-topic because the cuts have nothing to do with budget cuts.