Airline Pilot Forums

They just changed my IDTs to MPA for the next two days due to no money and said other units were sending people home with no pay. Anybody else experiencing this?

It's the FIRST month of the fiscal year! ***.

GF

The CRA only goes through 18 Nov. Given the expected fiscal shortfalls and the need for RPA for those already in formal training and seasoning tours, etc; the pressure on the funds are severe. Where possible, the funding is being shifted to more critical missions. Also, where possible, the funding source is being shifted to the Active Duty where more appropriate (i.e. the RPA needs to be preserved for AFRC funding requirements and MPA needs to be used for participation that supports the AD mission).

Airshows-cancelled; A/TA-cancelled; missions-cancelled; ORE and ORI cancelled? Fat chance....

You don't really think that OREs/ORIs should be cancelled because airshows and/or training missions might be cancelled? In case everyone hasn't heard, there are big changes being floated out there due to fiscal realities.

Lt Gen Stenner came to give us a town hall meeting last week...not good news...basically what has been said above is what he said...not looking good but like usual, I'm sure we'll have more RPA than we can spend come Aug 15th!

There was no AFRC-wide RPA dump last month as in previous years; if your unit had one, it was due to money being held at the Wing level. I wouldn't expect one this year either unless the CRA process continues throughout the entire year and there's a excessive late funding allocation from Congress late in the FY.

How can they not have money to do your Oct UTA's in Oct?

How can they not have money to do your Oct UTA's in Oct?

Exactly. I'm in that situation right now. If this isn't fixed by spring, it'll put a damper on asev & ori next year :)

How can they not have money to do your Oct UTA's in Oct?

Because the CRA only goes until 18 Nov. They don't give AFRC as much money per day as they can spend until then, they give an equivalent amount of money that equates to that period. UTAs, AT days, TPs, etc all come from a general RPA fund that must be managed accordingly - they are not individually owned by the members. If there are people in FTU with orders until 18 Dec, there are 30 days of pay tied up that can not be used for anyone else. The same goes for any bulk expenditures because front loaded expenses use up a disproportionate share of the available funds. AFRC is doing what anyone would do, they are prioritizing expenditures (their priorities may or may not match yours or mine) to things that are required by law/regulation or those that are mission-critical. Everything else is secondary.

By the way - these funding issues have been on the horizon for a couple of years; but you wouldn't know it by how little the AFRC units have changed the way they managed their money. Last year, plenty of wings were exceeding their spending glideslope starting in the first quarter. Not many are expecting it to get better unless an FY12 budget passes. If the auto cuts are forced, expect worse.

Same thing happening in our squadron. Pretty weak.

You don't really think that OREs/ORIs should be cancelled because airshows and/or training missions might be cancelled? In case everyone hasn't heard, there are big changes being floated out there due to fiscal realities.

Actually they should be. ORE/ORIs cost millions of dollars per flying wing. Couldn't this inspection be performed at a fraction of the cost? In reality, the US has been high ops tempo and in wars for the past 10 years. Isn't it possible that inspections could be curtailed during this period?

Of course, the format of ORI's can be changed; for example, they can conduct ORI's during actual deployments, etc. However, I disagree that ORI's in general should be cancelled just because IDT's are short during a CRA. ORI's go a long way to ensuring a standard despite the dislike of them.

The USAF as a whole could stand to lose 30% of its people (including contractors) and you would never notice. AFRC will have to endure it's share, also. How many people have been given man-days or IDT's to do nothing - not wx or ops cancel, but do nothing from the start? The staffs are bloated, I couldn't tell you why NAFs even existed, the guard is losing iron and I am sure AFRC will follow suit soon, etc. AFRC likes to talk about being a war-fighting command because the need for a cold-war reserve disappeared withthe cold war, but very few offices in AFRC actually act as if there is a war going on.

I don't support a lot of what's being done, but I can see reality. Things like the Force Generation Center, etc are here to stay. If the cuts have to come, where do you think they will come from? Remember, Generals make those decisions, they won't vote themselves out of a job. Those at the unit level better start making themselves very relevant or the future won't be so clear.

If a unit is TFI, the CC's better start convincing the AD side that they are indispensible. If the AD decides to stop paying MPA and a unit doesn't own iron, they'll be the first to become a fiscal casualty. Iron on the ramp justifies a lot of supporting manpower, TFI justifies nothing except TFI and MPA is a great barometer as to how indispensible a unit is. If a unit owns iron, but it's a dying airframe; better stop working on saving the airframe and start working on a relevant re-mission (FWIW - the guard is good at that right now grabbing RPA and the C-27J).

No one but Gen Stenner and his staff know exactly what's coming down the road, and even he says AFRC will emerge smaller and different than it is now. Not all units will suffer cuts, some will grow, but why would Wing CC's leave it to chance? MAJCOMM CC's want to know how to save money, AFRC can be a large part of that if they sell themselves correctly.

Couldn't agree more.....what a gigantic waste of time and resources. It's one thing to put on my CBRNE equipment to run around and play games during peacetime....but after deploying for 6 or 7 times for an ongoing war, shouldn't common sense prevail? Especially in a top heavy/low turnover reserve unit.....

Rant complete

Couldn't agree more.....what a gigantic waste of time and resources. It's one thing to put on my CBRNE equipment to run around and play games during peacetime....but after deploying for 6 or 7 times for an ongoing war, shouldn't common sense prevail? Especially in a top heavy/low turnover reserve unit.....

Rant complete

Not to mention the toll it takes on morale...

Not to mention the toll it takes on morale...

The beatings will continue...

Exactly. it'll put a damper on asev & ori next year :) Don't worry...you'll still be held responsible and thrown under the bus if you don't get an "Excellent"

Not to mention the toll it takes on morale...

A happy force that is not good at their primary responsibilities is not a good force. Ask the guys in our nuke force from a few years ago.

The only happy force is the Guard/Reserves, and as they are volunteers, the powers that be should try to keep them happy. One way to do this is get rid of the dog and pony show that is ORIs. At a minimum, get rid of the chem gear. I've been in 23 years and I've never felt like a chem attack was a realistic scenario. The closest possibility was Gulf War I. But I believe that when James Baker handed Tariq Aziz that envelope right before the war the note read "Go chemical and we will nuke the livin'sh!t out of you".
Want to balance the budget, quit buying chem gear! Something "new and better" comes out every 4 years, we buy a kabillion issues of it, it sits unused in warehouses, we throw it out after 4 years and buy a kabillion new issues--how much is this costing us.

In reality, if I gotta fly my jet into a contaminated zone with all that crap on--it just isn't going to work (not the equipment, the flying part).
Take away lesson--threaten to go nuclear on an adversary if they contemplate chem. Save billions on gear, and keep Reservists happy.

This thread sure has taken a focus on ORIs, but I have yet to see evidence that chem gear and ORIs were the sole reason people were unhappy. Granted, it is one of the many factors that may cause dissatisfaction and I never enjoyed dealing with it, but I doubt it rises to the level seen in this thread. I know a lot of people that moved on and none cited chem gear as the over-riding factor.

The only way happy guardsmen/reservists are ensured is by having other guardsmen/reservists vote with their feet. The military is the military, and it is MUCH easier to be a leader who does not put it on the line for the people. In the active duty, bad leaders can be bad leaders because the people have no alternative. In the Guard/Reserves, bad leaders that drive everyone out will soon find themselves in a new position; but not before those people leave. Senior leaders don't act until something drastic forces their hand. In real life, no senior leader fixes subordinate leadership issues unless the evidence is overwhelming (and even then it only happens sometimes). When dissatisfied people don't leave or quit working for whatever reasons, bad leaders continue to be bad leaders because they can.

Day to day to day, it is pay issues, scheduling difficulties, participation requirements, currency requirement issues, trivial minutia, excessive administrative requirements, difficulty of commute, effect on family time, frequency of deployments and length of deployments, etc that cause people to move on. When the leaders work hard to minimize these aggravations, people serve longer.

I think it's just the collective frustration of giving a durn about something and then watching fools make a mess of it all. Fortunately the AF is noticeably top heavy and will soon be getting a haircut. Hopefully the ivory towers and all their processes will get adjusted to a height where commanders can actually see what is going on. The whole concept of IDT is ridiculous anyway. Am I on duty or not. This comes from a long time reservist who has been fed by IDT at times. I spend half my time trying to fix a finance screw up or setting up my next pay status. All this because there is a system resistant to change. There is so much low hanging fruit (waste considered mission critical because no "leaders" can call a spade a spade and actually make a decision) that it frustrates those who see their quality of life, effectiveness, etc ****ed away for any number of bonehead reasons. Unfortunately voting with feet is the only way. It just seems senseless that it has to happen that way because the remedy will be stop loss. That will do nothing to improve the situation.

It's a frustration from trying to make a difference only knowing that you are perpetuating a monstrous cluster#%ck

What I've discovered in my time in USAFR leadership - you can make a difference.....to the people beneath you. That's pretty much it, there is no changing the system. Up the chain, there is no option but to play by their rules. We can buck the system up the chain, but the results aren't worth it; it's the people up the chain that set the rules, pay the bills, etc. I'd rather my people have what they need than suffer the consequences of me having a fragile ego. I am not above saying please, making everything sound like it was my leaders' idea, etc. And, I am NOT talking about compromising principals - I am talking about writing justifications for the dollars, preemptively seeing the consequences of bad policy and working within the system to change it before the negative effects set in, following basic ground rules set out by leadership above for participation, etc.

What I've discovered in my time in USAFR leadership - you can make a difference.....to the people beneath you. That's pretty much it, there is no changing the system. Up the chain, there is no option but to play by their rules. We can buck the system up the chain, but the results aren't worth it; it's the people up the chain that set the rules, pay the bills, etc. I'd rather my people have what they need than suffer the consequences of me having a fragile ego. I am not above saying please, making everything sound like it was my leaders' idea, etc. And, I am NOT talking about compromising principals - I am talking about writing justifications for the dollars, preemptively seeing the consequences of bad policy and working within the system to change it before the negative effects set in, following basic ground rules set out by leadership above for participation, etc.

I don't always agree with you, but this is spot on. Heck, I think I want to print this out and hang it in my office. Or workstation, or shop, or whatever else they call it these days. Well, said LiM.

A happy force that is not good at their primary responsibilities is not a good force. Ask the guys in our nuke force from a few years ago.

They weren't happy. Maybe that's why they possibly made mistakes. That community does ORI after NORI after ORE, non stop.

A happy force that is not good at their primary responsibilities is not a good force. Ask the guys in our nuke force from a few years ago.

Dude, we've been doing our wartime job for 10 years now. Your argument makes no sense...

Dude, we've been doing our wartime job for 10 years now. Your argument makes no sense...

10 years straight???? Just wondering what that meant. I know of a lot of squadrons that have been doing their jobs for years but they still require training. Fighter squadrons return from deployments to a back to basics building block training program. Airlift guys still do pattern pro sorties and have recurring sims/evals, don't they? Are you saying the suspension of standards is in order? For you to suggest that HHQ's eliminate all operational oversight/quality assurance efforts over a 10-year span because of a 1:4, 1:5, or higher deployment rate is rather short-sighted.

What makes no sense? You can have a squadron full of people that are very happy, but if they are happy because they are not held to standards, etc then they won't necessarily be good at their job - happiness alone does not equal good performance. That's pretty simple and clear.

ReCAL, were you talking about SAC, because the environment you described hasn't existed since 1993? The nuke guys were held to stringent standards 20 years ago. Over the years, things softened up - undoubtedly the shift occurred for many reasons, but maybe it was done partly to ease up on the people to keep them happy. The result, of course, was nuke related parts sent to Taiwan and a nuke weapon transported unknowingly from Minot to Barksdale.

Besides the CSAF and SECAF being fired, the nuclear surety inspections started up again in earnest. I am not going to talk specifics, but needless to say the ratings were exceedingly low. Notable issues were not limited to aircrew, weapons troops were unfamiliar with procedures and security forces didn't know their jobs. Why didn't they do their jobs well? Because a happy troop does not equal a good troop - a well trained and motivated troop who is properly equipped and given the appropriate authority to make operational decisions makes a good troop.

A good commander takes care of his people and gives them what they need to do their job, but his job is not to make happy troops, it's to make good ones. When you're in the peanut gallery, it's easy to sing kumbayah and think about how great of a CC you'll be. You'll satisfy every single desire, accommodate every request, give unlimited 3-day passes, etc. When you actually become CC, you realize that you work for an OG/CC and WG/CC and you are entrusted with turning taxpayer dollars into national defense. They will give you a job that takes 10 people, but they will give you 6. You'll ask for 1,000 MPA days and you'll get 100 (maybe). It's nice to imagine that the taxpayers paid for an F-16 and pay your salary because you want to have fun flying, but the reality is that they paid that money for you to employ that F-16 in combat. If your bosses think that part of staying combat-ready is simulating a chemical environment and enduring a Phase I or Phase II every once in a while, so be it - you signed up for that when you joined the unit. If they insist that you justify the expenditure of limited resources on your sortie by conducting valid training, so be it.

You can't remember those days when the airlift squadron was mobilized and everyone was getting 30 days off every 60 days without recognizing that the rest of the USAF saw that waste and have taken steps to ensure that it doesn't happen again. There is a reason why the TTF's went away and why many of you won't get MPA this year.

Happy troops may be a nice side effect of the employment of good leadership in the pursuit of national defense, but happy troops in themselves are not the ultimate goal. In the upcoming transition to an efficient and effective USAFR, there will be plenty of unhappy people who will complain about the good days past. The past is gone. However; those that emerge on the back end will be better prepared to stick around for the long haul and will be happier in the long run because they will still have a paycheck and, more importantly, an enduring role in our nation's defense.

As much as I hate to say it...the reserves probably shouldn't exist (guard, yes at some level)...merely a status to the active...especially if you're pushing folks more towards "operational." Then active duty abuses the reserves...reserves get upset and leave...active duty makes their own deal worse...forcing actives to reserves...rinse repeat. The military ivory types will find the carrot of leaning on labor too much to resist. It's easy and many corporations have done it time and time again. None of this fixes the infrastructure problems and systems that are resistant to change. This is why I think all the current retirement plans are toast for those coming up the ranks. It's just too easy of a solution and is an easy fix for a big wad of money. Is it wrong? Not necessarily...but it just shows the direction that leadership is thinking...preserve institutions...squeeze turnip...soon I'll move on and it will be someone else's problem. I hope that there are some genuine "efficiencies" being considered but the first thing I heard concerned retirement and compensation. Classic! Maybe it's all just a way to trim down the force post Gulf Etc. and start the clock again. Halls at Maxwell are filled with tomes expressing the need for structural change...as it was never really done fully post Cold War...no one really wants to change though. In the mean time i'll keep trying to get my pay fixed for something that had nothing to do with me. It's nice to think about what could be though isn't it?

Maybe I'm a little harsh on "ivory tower" types. I just use that expression because they are the ones asking for new uniforms etc. during a budget crunch. Short of folks running around naked due to lack of uniforms, this shows an "ivory tower" level of isolation.

10 years straight???? Just wondering what that meant. I know of a lot of squadrons that have been doing their jobs for years but they still require training. Fighter squadrons return from deployments to a back to basics building block training program. Airlift guys still do pattern pro sorties and have recurring sims/evals, don't they? Are you saying the suspension of standards is in order? For you to suggest that HHQ's eliminate all operational oversight/quality assurance efforts over a 10-year span because of a 1:4, 1:5, or higher deployment rate is rather short-sighted.

What makes no sense? You can have a squadron full of people that are very happy, but if they are happy because they are not held to standards, etc then they won't necessarily be good at their job - happiness alone does not equal good performance. That's pretty simple and clear.

ReCAL, were you talking about SAC, because the environment you described hasn't existed since 1993? The nuke guys were held to stringent standards 20 years ago. Over the years, things softened up - undoubtedly the shift occurred for many reasons, but maybe it was done partly to ease up on the people to keep them happy. The result, of course, was nuke related parts sent to Taiwan and a nuke weapon transported unknowingly from Minot to Barksdale.

Besides the CSAF and SECAF being fired, the nuclear surety inspections started up again in earnest. I am not going to talk specifics, but needless to say the ratings were exceedingly low. Notable issues were not limited to aircrew, weapons troops were unfamiliar with procedures and security forces didn't know their jobs. Why didn't they do their jobs well? Because a happy troop does not equal a good troop - a well trained and motivated troop who is properly equipped and given the appropriate authority to make operational decisions makes a good troop.

A good commander takes care of his people and gives them what they need to do their job, but his job is not to make happy troops, it's to make good ones. When you're in the peanut gallery, it's easy to sing kumbayah and think about how great of a CC you'll be. You'll satisfy every single desire, accommodate every request, give unlimited 3-day passes, etc. When you actually become CC, you realize that you work for an OG/CC and WG/CC and you are entrusted with turning taxpayer dollars into national defense. They will give you a job that takes 10 people, but they will give you 6. You'll ask for 1,000 MPA days and you'll get 100 (maybe). It's nice to imagine that the taxpayers paid for an F-16 and pay your salary because you want to have fun flying, but the reality is that they paid that money for you to employ that F-16 in combat. If your bosses think that part of staying combat-ready is simulating a chemical environment and enduring a Phase I or Phase II every once in a while, so be it - you signed up for that when you joined the unit. If they insist that you justify the expenditure of limited resources on your sortie by conducting valid training, so be it.

You can't remember those days when the airlift squadron was mobilized and everyone was getting 30 days off every 60 days without recognizing that the rest of the USAF saw that waste and have taken steps to ensure that it doesn't happen again. There is a reason why the TTF's went away and why many of you won't get MPA this year.

Happy troops may be a nice side effect of the employment of good leadership in the pursuit of national defense, but happy troops in themselves are not the ultimate goal. In the upcoming transition to an efficient and effective USAFR, there will be plenty of unhappy people who will complain about the good days past. The past is gone. However; those that emerge on the back end will be better prepared to stick around for the long haul and will be happier in the long run because they will still have a paycheck and, more importantly, an enduring role in our nation's defense.

Put down the Air War College crack pipe! Get a grip!

I don't see a lot of happiness in the military now. If the job market was better, you wouldn't see the retention that we have now. Ancillary training is never ending. We deploy time and time again, and now we have to practice "deploying" for some pencil neck that hasn't left HQ for years. I never advocated ending inspections, I simply state that they could be done much more efficiently and with less negative impact on personnel. Stop applying old threats and unbelievable scenarios that don't reflect our actual missions.

No one needs to deploy to a CRTC to perform these inspections. It is beyond ridiculous and in times of a budget crisis, damn near fraud.

I don't know about you, but if the Kaiser attacks us with mustard gas I want to be ready! :)

Mem, I think there is some validity to what you say, but please explain how the current ORI/CI/ASEV cycle is relevant to today's AF. Roll it all into one relevant, realistic rinspection and make it a no-notice to boot. Better yet, throw an inspector on a deploying airplane. If everyone is current and qualified and gets where they're going safely, the unit passes.

IDTs and Mandays are likely to become rare in the next few years. I think we're going to see radical cutbacks in the Defense budget.
I retired from the Reserves Sep 10 since I was over 1095 and mandays going into FY11 were getting hard to come by. Fortunately, I was able to cobble together an active duty retirement.
Good luck to all who continue to serve and thank you for your service.

Put down the Air War College crack pipe! Get a grip!

If anything in your post gives you credibility, this sure does...of course, it is in line with the depth of logic common today. Perhaps I have applied original thought to this topic and crafted my ideas on my own....no, you're correct, I went to the AU frequently asked questions website and cut/paste my response. That must be why the people in my squadron have a good QOL, MPA days, and IDTs available to them.

I don't see a lot of happiness in the military now. If the job market was better, you wouldn't see the retention that we have now.

Actually, compared to the 60's and 70's, happiness is through the roof. As for the job market, there is nothing that leadership can do to keep people from leaving short of making military service nearly as financially rewarding with as many hours off as a potential civilian career. As always, there are those that will stay and those that will go; in times of economic concern, people will endure more - it's supply and demand and the military has been dealing with that since there was a military.

Ancillary training is never ending. We deploy time and time again, and now we have to practice "deploying" for some pencil neck that hasn't left HQ for years. I never advocated ending inspections, I simply state that they could be done much more efficiently and with less negative impact on personnel.

Ancillary training was not a part of this discussion; for the record, I am not a fan. Never advocated ending inspections??? This is your quote from a previousl post: "In reality, the US has been high ops tempo and in wars for the past 10 years. Isn't it possible that inspections could be curtailed during this period?" That's exactly what you advocated. If you review the posts, you'll see that I did mention that the format of inspections could be modified. However, unlike you, I also know that the inspections measure the effectiveness of more than flight ops. For example, maybe those Minot weapons troops could have benefitted from a few more inspections a few years ago? Today's deployment rates DO NOT stress the entire USAF to the level of a all-out war effort, and until we no longer have China/Russia/N Korea/etc to worry about as a conventional threat, maybe we should still practice to that possibility.

No one needs to deploy to a CRTC to perform these inspections. It is beyond ridiculous and in times of a budget crisis, damn near fraud.

No one??? Are you sure that no one in the USAF or USAFR could benefit from this? Are you saying that this limited war is keeping our full-spectrum USAF razor sharp? That's quite a myoptic view, but unfortunately one that is common in a USAF PILOT vs a USAF OFFICER.

Tanker-Driver - if you read the earlier posts you'll see that I did say that the structure of inspections could be changed. However; are you sure that the logisitical system doesn't need to be tested with a full-scale deployment versus the limited deployments units have been doing? How about maintenance, shouldn't MX be tested with a full-scale all in generation rather than tested on the ability to generate just 15% to 20% of the aircraft? What about security forces, given our curent AEF style of deploying SF, shouldn't they still be tested on the ability to mobilize? How about the medical and all of the other host base agencies, shouldn't their ability to support a full-scale deployment be tested?

For all who are unaware, ORIs test the military against their assigned wartime taskings (those they should be prepared to handle when the balloon goes up), not just the taskings that we've seen over the last X years. While I recognize and appreciate the wit of Hours' post, the reality is that if it is a required task than it is a tested task, regardless of the probability that it will ever be utilized in the real world.

If anything in your post gives you credibility, this sure does...of course, it is in line with the depth of logic common today. Perhaps I have applied original thought to this topic and crafted my ideas on my own....no, you're correct, I went to the AU frequently asked questions website and cut/paste my response. That must be why the people in my squadron have a good QOL, MPA days, and IDTs available to them.



Actually, compared to the 60's and 70's, happiness is through the roof. As for the job market, there is nothing that leadership can do to keep people from leaving short of making military service nearly as financially rewarding with as many hours off as a potential civilian career. As always, there are those that will stay and those that will go; in times of economic concern, people will endure more - it's supply and demand and the military has been dealing with that since there was a military.



Ancillary training was not a part of this discussion; for the record, I am not a fan. Never advocated ending inspections??? This is your quote from a previousl post: "In reality, the US has been high ops tempo and in wars for the past 10 years. Isn't it possible that inspections could be curtailed during this period?" That's exactly what you advocated. If you review the posts, you'll see that I did mention that the format of inspections could be modified. However, unlike you, I also know that the inspections measure the effectiveness of more than flight ops. For example, maybe those Minot weapons troops could have benefitted from a few more inspections a few years ago? Today's deployment rates DO NOT stress the entire USAF to the level of a all-out war effort, and until we no longer have China/Russia/N Korea/etc to worry about as a conventional threat, maybe we should still practice to that possibility.



No one??? Are you sure that no one in the USAF or USAFR could benefit from this? Are you saying that this limited war is keeping our full-spectrum USAF razor sharp? That's quite a myoptic view, but unfortunately one that is common in a USAF PILOT vs a USAF OFFICER.

Tanker-Driver - if you read the earlier posts you'll see that I did say that the structure of inspections could be changed. However; are you sure that the logisitical system doesn't need to be tested with a full-scale deployment versus the limited deployments units have been doing? How about maintenance, shouldn't MX be tested with a full-scale all in generation rather than tested on the ability to generate just 15% to 20% of the aircraft? What about security forces, given our curent AEF style of deploying SF, shouldn't they still be tested on the ability to mobilize? How about the medical and all of the other host base agencies, shouldn't their ability to support a full-scale deployment be tested?

For all who are unaware, ORIs test the military against their assigned wartime taskings (those they should be prepared to handle when the balloon goes up), not just the taskings that we've seen over the last X years.

Oh boy... Tired from patting yourself on the back?

From my many years of military service, most of the people that see themselves as great leaders are usually the only ones that think so. Just something to think about.

Why do you quote the entire post for an irrelevant and off-topic comment?

Patting myself on the back? Really??? Did you get that from the entire post that you qouted or are you referring to my comment about the MPA? That's just fact - in the real world results speak for themselves. It's black and white, the dollars are there and that's what matters to those people in my squadron who have fallen back on the USAFR due to those economic times you wrote about earlier. How's this for patting myself on the back; EVERY troughing TR that I had in FY11 is still employed full-time in FY12 (and the MPA allocation will last through the year as long as the gov't doesn't shut down). Lucky for them that I am such a AWC junkie, huh??? Despite what you may think, that does not happen by accident; the AD does not just give those dollars away. But, you know better than that. If only I had spent my time focused on making them happy like you will when they beg you to be CC (I know, you're above taking that job).

So it may be more clear for you, you can sit around all day and b***ch about things from a partially-informed viewpoint and get absolutely nothing done, or you can recognize the futility of complaining and set to taking care of business. The lesson applies in all aspects of life; they set the rules and write the checks, learn the rules of their game, play within the rules of their game, and get the results you desire. Or you can complain that those that do get things done must be tired from patting themselves on the back.

While I don't agree with many things leadership does, I do recognize that there are usually nuggets of good reason pointing to why most things are done. I try to recognize those WHYs (such as WHY do those dumb leaders insist on ORIs) and then use them to sway the ruling to my benefit.

Why do you quote the entire post for an irrelevant and off-topic comment?

Patting myself on the back? Really??? Did you get that from the entire post that you qouted or are you referring to my comment about the MPA? That's just fact - in the real world results speak for themselves. It's black and white, the dollars are there and that's what matters to those people in my squadron who have fallen back on the USAFR due to those economic times you wrote about earlier. How's this for patting myself on the back; EVERY troughing TR that I had in FY11 is still employed full-time in FY12 (and the MPA allocation will last through the year as long as the gov't doesn't shut down). Lucky for them that I am such a AWC junkie, huh??? Despite what you may think, that does not happen by accident; the AD does not just give those dollars away. But, you know better than that. If only I had spent my time focused on making them happy like you will when they beg you to be CC (I know, you're above taking that job).

So it may be more clear for you, you can sit around all day and b***ch about things from a partially-informed viewpoint and get absolutely nothing done, or you can recognize the futility of complaining and set to taking care of business. The lesson applies in all aspects of life; they set the rules and write the checks, learn the rules of their game, play within the rules of their game, and get the results you desire. Or you can complain that those that do get things done must be tired from patting themselves on the back.

While I don't agree with many things leadership does, I do recognize that there are usually nuggets of good reason pointing to why most things are done. I try to recognize those WHYs (such as WHY do those dumb leaders insist on ORIs) and then use them to sway the ruling to my benefit.

You certainly think a lot about yourself!

Ok, I'll compare. Everyone in my squadron that wants long term MPA has it. We still have IDT. If you have a need the Air Force wants, you'll continue to have MPA. Did you think you were the only unit that had guys on MPA? Geez, General Patton stand down!!

First, it can't be an APC discussion unless it goes personal - and you obliged that requirement.

Let me summarize - I agreed with you that it was my blind faith to all things AU that gets me what I need. You decided that an appropriate response was to accuse me of boastfullness. I then made an honest person of you and demonstrated that boastfullness that I was accused of as I pointed out that I actually did get results for my people. The irony there is that I did that on purpose because your earlier posts purported to focus on how it was all about the people's happiness. Of course, I think the best way to keep them happy is to keep them paid, so I was showing you that I actually do work to keep people happy despite the fact that I am an AWC junkie. Instead of you responding with the ways that you actively work to keep people happy because you know so much better, you tried to state that keeping people employed during these times is easy.

The reality is that your statement about MPA is not true. Getting MPA to do the mission and keeping EVERYONE who wants to be employed full-time are two different things. Not every squadron with MPA provided the justification to be given their full required FY allocation up front. There are plenty of squadrons that have discovered that, despite the fact that they serve USAF needs, they aren't getting 179-day per diem waivers approved. Other squadrons who serve critical USAF needs have discovered that their 1095 waivers are getting denied. Even more squadrons that serve USAF needs have O-5's that are finding out that they have to go elsewhere if they want to stay actively employed by the USAFR. Even squadrons with substantial MPA are only able to put individuals on that MPA for 1, 2 or 3 weeks at a time.

Even though a squadron may have plenty of people on MPA, every person who wants to be on MPA full-time may not be (and probably isn't). Even though many people within a squadron may be on MPA, not everyone who wants to be is not on continuous orders earning medical coverage and leave.

That takes active management and tough decisions, and none of those revolve solely around making people happy. They revolve around being a good leader, administrator, and officer. Such benefits require good hiring decisions and UMD management. Although previous squadron leadership tried to make everyone happy as they created overages and overgrades in every billet, how happy are those O-5s being told to leave now?

While it may be easy for you to state on an anonymous internet that everyone in your squadron has everything they need, I doubt that they do (odds are I am right given the state of affairs today). If they do, I applaud your squadron leadership and am happy they have a bigger picture on how things work in the USAF than you do.

The ultimate happiness of the USAFR and ANG in general does not revolve around the requirement to do ORIs and OREs; despite the fact that nobody likes doing them. Doing things solely to make people happy never results in people being happy in the long run. It's easy to make generic comments like "we should curtail ORIs" on the internet because their are no consequences to be concerned about with such postings. In the real world, it's leaders doing administrative things and leadership things that end up determining how happy people are. It's silly things like awards, OPRs/EPRs, equal distribution of good as well as bad deals, disciplining the 20% so the 80% don't have to carry their load as well, PRFs, mentoring, concern for family, fiscal responsibility, etc. If to you articulation sounds like boastfulness, too bad.

The fact is there will always be people in the peanut gallery who think it's all so easy and they can't figure out why those leaders are just so dumb. If only they weren't such great pilots, they'd show how great a leader they were.

Now this is funny. First of all, you assume you are the only one in a command position. Second, all of these great things you say you have accomplished (1095, per diem waiver, etc) are not uncommon. The bottom line is that if you have a mission that the Air Force needs, you'll get these things approved. Units that aren't getting MPA or waivers aren't in demand at this time. We get all of our waivers approved even though the process is more difficult now. We don't pat ourselves on the back for doing our job...

This back and forth is pointless. Just because you say it doesn't mean that anyone thinks it's true. They don't even have to take my word for it. I am pretty sure that it is the experience of most that the 1095 waivers, etc are not happening wholesale anymore; to include units with a critical need for the USAF. What happened 2 years ago and what is happening now are two different things. The waiver request has to justify the need for the individual, not the need for the unit - OG/CC, WG/CC, and even AD MAJCOM/CV policy is usually find someone else. If the waivers are getting approved, thank the leadership for standing their ground, I've had to re-attack after the MAJCOM CV denied the applications with a request for more info. The easy answer is to say "yes, sir" to the WG/CC and find someone else. There are plenty of people on this board even who are not on orders any more because their MPA, 179, and/or 1095 ran out; many were in critical billets. On the one hand you say that people are doing this due to the economy and on the other you don't recognize that the result is a pool of replacement individuals ready to take the place of anyone with 1095, etc issues. If that weren't true, I wouldn't be getting nearly as many phone calls as I am now.

I'm sorry but...


Actually, compared to the 60's and 70's, happiness is through the roof.


Really? :confused:

Dude, you must be a reservist.

I don't know ANYONE who plans on making this a career. I've been deployed 280 days a year for 6 years with no end in sight. That's 4.6 out of 6 years DEPLOYED. Not in a hotel on some cool TDY like in the 1990's. In prison. And I'm only about halfway done with my commitment. I just don't see how we could be more happy than they were in the 70's, at least not on the flying side. I call bulls&%t.

The USAF is about to find out reap what it sows. The US taxpayer expects you to produce a national defense with it's tax dollars and the "ivory towers" (I like that term :)) have been spending them on SLICC pods, PT gear, civilian PT testers, and ever more O-6 billets along with associated queep. Guess what most competitive corporations have figured out? It's COST EFFECTIVE to take care of your people! Screw over your best and you'll save short term on the bottom line, but in the end your competition will eat your lunch as the best and brightest leave.

How cost effective is paying $3.5 million dollars to train someone ($350,000/year for a 10 year commitment) only to crap all over their life? As a fully seasoned IP I'm worth a heck of a lot more than the initial $3.5M it cost to train me as a basic co-pilot, and I'm gone here soon and I'm taking my friends with me. The 10 year commitments are coming up now, expect a weakening in our defense as the best leave.

Good job thinking short term.

Passers observations are becoming more common. Many are staying and striving for some irresistible carrot. The upcoming budgeting will move and shuffle those carrots. It will be interesting to see how this changes things and how many folks vote with their feet. When most people around you are hanging out for retirement then something is wrong. I remember when everyone was flipping houses not long ago. That didn't turn out to well for many. You can't vote with feet due contract, retirement, or QOL. Most or all of these things are up for review in Jan.

This back and forth is pointless. Just because you say it doesn't mean that anyone thinks it's true. They don't even have to take my word for it. I am pretty sure that it is the experience of most that the 1095 waivers, etc are not happening wholesale anymore; to include units with a critical need for the USAF. What happened 2 years ago and what is happening now are two different things. The waiver request has to justify the need for the individual, not the need for the unit - OG/CC, WG/CC, and even AD MAJCOM/CV policy is usually find someone else. If the waivers are getting approved, thank the leadership for standing their ground, I've had to re-attack after the MAJCOM CV denied the applications with a request for more info. The easy answer is to say "yes, sir" to the WG/CC and find someone else. There are plenty of people on this board even who are not on orders any more because their MPA, 179, and/or 1095 ran out; many were in critical billets. On the one hand you say that people are doing this due to the economy and on the other you don't recognize that the result is a pool of replacement individuals ready to take the place of anyone with 1095, etc issues. If that weren't true, I wouldn't be getting nearly as many phone calls as I am now.

Oh brother...

Obviously you need more experience on the 1095 waiver process. This summer, the process changed. Individuals deploying to the AOR (not transiting) are automatically approved. Others now require SAF approval. We haven't had a waiver rejected. Not one. They need a justification, and again, you are off the mark. What impact on the mission does it have if the waiver isn't approved? Then they ask if other volunteers were sought out and available. We tell them the truth, we can't do our mission if the waivers aren't approved.

These 1095 waivers, per diem waivers, and MPA will be approved as long as the Air Force needs our services. Once they don't, we won't be filing waivers because they won't need us on MPA. It's really that simple. Don't give yourself too much credit.

Passers observations are becoming more common. Many are staying and striving for some irresistible carrot. The upcoming budgeting will move and shuffle those carrots. It will be interesting to see how this changes things and how many folks vote with their feet. When most people around you are hanging out for retirement then something is wrong. I remember when everyone was flipping houses not long ago. That didn't turn out to well for many. You can't vote with feet due contract, retirement, or QOL. Most or all of these things are up for review in Jan.

Grasshopper, I'm expecting cutbacks that will make the ones in the 90s look like a picnic. There are going to be many politicians from both sides of the aisle looking for cutbacks now that we're withdrawing from Iraq.
There have been a couple of Air Force force shaping boards in the last couple of years but if the DoD budget gets slashed to meet our fiscal realities, I wouldn't be surprised to see the active duty numbers cut in half over the next few years. If one's not hitting 18 years active duty before the end of FY2012, things have the potential to get very dicey for an active duty retirement. And anyone who doesn't meet deployment and fitness standards is painting a huge bullseye on their backs.

I'm sorry but...



Really? :confused:

Dude, you must be a reservist.

I don't know ANYONE who plans on making this a career. I've been deployed 280 days a year for 6 years with no end in sight. That's 4.6 out of 6 years DEPLOYED. Not in a hotel on some cool TDY like in the 1990's. In prison. And I'm only about halfway done with my commitment. I just don't see how we could be more happy than they were in the 70's, at least not on the flying side. I call bulls&%t.

The USAF is about to find out reap what it sows. The US taxpayer expects you to produce a national defense with it's tax dollars and the "ivory towers" (I like that term :)) have been spending them on SLICC pods, PT gear, civilian PT testers, and ever more O-6 billets along with associated queep. Guess what most competitive corporations have figured out? It's COST EFFECTIVE to take care of your people! Screw over your best and you'll save short term on the bottom line, but in the end your competition will eat your lunch as the best and brightest leave.

How cost effective is paying $3.5 million dollars to train someone ($350,000/year for a 10 year commitment) only to crap all over their life? As a fully seasoned IP I'm worth a heck of a lot more than the initial $3.5M it cost to train me as a basic co-pilot, and I'm gone here soon and I'm taking my friends with me. The 10 year commitments are coming up now, expect a weakening in our defense as the best leave.

Good job thinking short term.

+1! Can't speak for the 70s, but like you said, the first of the 10 year commitments are coming up very soon, it is going to be very interesting to see the exodous. There was just a VSP offered for '01 majors, '03-05 captains, guess what? 60% of the 900 that applied for it were pilots. Just look at that, 60%. '03-05 guys have only been flying for about 4-6 years, that means they have about 1000-2000 hours and very little PIC. Therefore, they are not very marketable to the airlines, you know what they said when you tell them that? So, who gives a f--- about the airlines. They just want out. Tired of it all. Its one thing to deploy for 6 on 6 off or something similar to being gone 250-300 days every year but then have to come back and worry about BS like PT tests, masters degrees, SOS and other crap that is spewed by the leadership. So what we are being told is yes, I have a good deal 179 or 365 for you and when you get home I need you to have your SOS in residence done while getting your masters degree so you can leave again for 6 weeks 3 days after getting home so you can go to SOS. Then, if you don't have ACSC done by the time you pin on Major you are some sort of dirt bag, seriously?

Anyone seen the OPR review on Youtube? It completely explains todays AF. If you haven't, here it is, totally worth the watch.

OPR review - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8KxC4Wo5hI)

+1! Can't speak for the 70s, but like you said, the first of the 10 year commitments are coming up very soon, it is going to be very interesting to see the exodous. There was just a VSP offered for '01 majors, '03-05 captains, guess what? 60% of the 900 that applied for it were pilots. Just look at that, 60%. '03-05 guys have only been flying for about 4-6 years, that means they have about 1000-2000 hours and very little PIC. Therefore, they are not very marketable to the airlines, you know what they said when you tell them that? So, who gives a f--- about the airlines. They just want out. Tired of it all. Its one thing to deploy for 6 on 6 off or something similar to being gone 250-300 days every year but then have to come back and worry about BS like PT tests, masters degrees, SOS and other crap that is spewed by the leadership. So what we are being told is yes, I have a good deal 179 or 365 for you and when you get home I need you to have your SOS in residence done while getting your masters degree so you can leave again for 6 weeks 3 days after getting home so you can go to SOS. Then, if you don't have ACSC done by the time you pin on Major you are some sort of dirt bag, seriously?

True statement. In my squadron, the only people who didn't try to VSP were either:

a.) Not eligible.

b.) Just had a child or bought a house. (Remember we only had like 30 days to decide to submit.)

Believe me they all wanted to.

It may line up that the exodus matches up with a drawdown through sheer luck of timing. That would be a tragedy, because the lesson will not have been learned and the check will have to be paid later and possibly at greater cost to our national defense. Believe me, the check will be paid though. This sort of treatment and complete lack of focus cannot continue indefinitely.

I am on AD for training right now, and I was shocked to see how worn out and mistreated the helo community is now. I have met numerous quality guys who are not getting promoted. Most of these dudes are IPs who have deployed at least a couple of times.

It is a damned shame.

I am on AD for training right now, and I was shocked to see how worn out and mistreated the helo community is now. I have met numerous quality guys who are not getting promoted. Most of these dudes are IPs who have deployed at least a couple of times.

It is a damned shame.

As long as I can remember, the helo community's always been a ticket to becoming a passed over major.

True statement. In my squadron, the only people who didn't try to VSP were either:

a.) Not eligible.

b.) Just had a child or bought a house. (Remember we only had like 30 days to decide to submit.)

Believe me they all wanted to.

It may line up that the exodus matches up with a drawdown through sheer luck of timing. That would be a tragedy, because the lesson will not have been learned and the check will have to be paid later and possibly at greater cost to our national defense. Believe me, the check will be paid though. This sort of treatment and complete lack of focus cannot continue indefinitely.

Exactly. I have roughly 85 or so pilots in my squadron, depending on if you count the attached folks. If the AF were to come out tomorrow and say you could leave, no questions asked, no separation pay, no penalties, you're just cleared to go... about 70 would leave in an instant. There are people who aren't even close to being competitive for an airline gig... and it doesn't matter. They'll take their chances with unemployment.

The 15 who would stay? "Leadership" within a couple years of retirement (good luck with that, hopefully there's still a retirement to be had in the future!), a couple folks whose kids have ridiculous medical issues and are completely dependent upon TriCare (again, good luck!), and a few who've been so totally brainwashed by the AF that they have no idea what they'd do without it.

It's funny... I see people panicking about the massive budget cuts that are around the corner, and yet in my squadron, news of potential cuts is met with celebration because it might possibly mean an end to this nonsense. It's that bad.

I'm sorry but...



Really? :confused:

Dude, you must be a reservist.

I don't know ANYONE who plans on making this a career. I've been deployed 280 days a year for 6 years with no end in sight. That's 4.6 out of 6 years DEPLOYED. Not in a hotel on some cool TDY like in the 1990's. In prison. And I'm only about halfway done with my commitment. I just don't see how we could be more happy than they were in the 70's, at least not on the flying side. I call bulls&%t.

The USAF is about to find out reap what it sows. The US taxpayer expects you to produce a national defense with it's tax dollars and the "ivory towers" (I like that term :)) have been spending them on SLICC pods, PT gear, civilian PT testers, and ever more O-6 billets along with associated queep. Guess what most competitive corporations have figured out? It's COST EFFECTIVE to take care of your people! Screw over your best and you'll save short term on the bottom line, but in the end your competition will eat your lunch as the best and brightest leave.

How cost effective is paying $3.5 million dollars to train someone ($350,000/year for a 10 year commitment) only to crap all over their life? As a fully seasoned IP I'm worth a heck of a lot more than the initial $3.5M it cost to train me as a basic co-pilot, and I'm gone here soon and I'm taking my friends with me. The 10 year commitments are coming up now, expect a weakening in our defense as the best leave.

Good job thinking short term.

Speaking of thinking short term, where are you and your friends going to go? Please don't mistake my tone, I'm honestly curious as to what jobs you guys have in mind. Guard/Reserve only has so many full time or part time slots, airlines are a crap shoot, economy is in the tank, professional jobs are at a premium. What's your plan when you leave?

Of course, the format of ORI's can be changed; for example, they can conduct ORI's during actual deployments, etc.

AFSOCs AFRC Wing had their ORI CNX. Credit for time served in real-world deployments and OREs, basically.

ALL MAJCOM IGs need to think that way. I just finished an ORE, and my DO had come off an ORI as an augmentee. The waster of $ is unbelivable. A 2.5 hr mission on a C5 just to see if they can launch. How much does that waste in one evening?

Do I hate MOPP 4? Yep...but one day, some day might we need it? Yep. No reason we cannot have an inspection at home, or over a day or two.

To arguue with myself, however, Ops almost never fails. It's usually the MSG - from what I have seen, specifally LRS...ie getting out of town and gettin back into town.

This back and forth is pointless. Just because you say it doesn't mean that anyone thinks it's true. They don't even have to take my word for it. I am pretty sure that it is the experience of most that the 1095 waivers, etc are not happening wholesale anymore; to include units with a critical need for the USAF. What happened 2 years ago and what is happening now are two different things. The waiver request has to justify the need for the individual, not the need for the unit - OG/CC, WG/CC, and even AD MAJCOM/CV policy is usually find someone else. If the waivers are getting approved, thank the leadership for standing their ground, I've had to re-attack after the MAJCOM CV denied the applications with a request for more info. The easy answer is to say "yes, sir" to the WG/CC and find someone else. There are plenty of people on this board even who are not on orders any more because their MPA, 179, and/or 1095 ran out; many were in critical billets. On the one hand you say that people are doing this due to the economy and on the other you don't recognize that the result is a pool of replacement individuals ready to take the place of anyone with 1095, etc issues. If that weren't true, I wouldn't be getting nearly as many phone calls as I am now.

Well here is the problem with THAT....that waiver is NOT for the individual. That waiver is supposed to be for the "slot" or "job". I have a close friend at the Pentagon who is on one of the briefing teams - we had a long discussion about this. He admitted most wing and MPFs. etc have no clue about that. So having hte WG/CC find someone else is not the answer.

The reason for that 1095 rule is - if that position is needed for more than 1095 it should be an AD position. If they can't fill it there is a waiver process for the position....so the same guy should be able to get it for 16 years theoretically....you should not HAVE to "find someone else" - that is contrary to the original purpose of this 1095 rule.

FYI - not pointing fingers at you....just frustrated that I have seen this too often lately. Heck even I was surprised when he explained that to me. BTW my sis in law and my buddy got those waivers - evidently they are 1) that important or 2) their Wing folks know the true purpose of it

Speaking of thinking short term, where are you and your friends going to go? Please don't mistake my tone, I'm honestly curious as to what jobs you guys have in mind. Guard/Reserve only has so many full time or part time slots, airlines are a crap shoot, economy is in the tank, professional jobs are at a premium. What's your plan when you leave?

Obviously I'm on this forum, so that says something about what I'd like to do. That being said, I'm open to anything at this point. I'm a smart guy, with people skills, (or so I tell myself). While unemployment is sitting at 10% or so, that means employment is sitting at 90%. I'll be OK, what I won't be doing is wasting my entire life away in a "cell block" at Al Udeid. What good is money if the prime years of your life are spent in purgatory?

I think I've hijacked this thread enough though. So the Guard is out of money again? :rolleyes:

Speaking of thinking short term, where are you and your friends going to go? Please don't mistake my tone, I'm honestly curious as to what jobs you guys have in mind. Guard/Reserve only has so many full time or part time slots, airlines are a crap shoot, economy is in the tank, professional jobs are at a premium. What's your plan when you leave?

Perhaps I'll pursue a job in the guard or reserve. Perhaps I'll pursue an airline gig. Perhaps I'll go back to a real school for a real masters in something I really value. Perhaps I'll open a bar on the beach in Tahiti, grow a kickass beard, smoke ganja all day and blow lines with hot chicks with questionable morals all night. Lots of options, none of which involve the constant fear of a 365 to Afghanistan, a Predator to Clovis, or whether or not I've done enough volunteering for the squadron Christmas Party hanging over my head. Lots of options!

In all honesty, I've saved myself a nice little unemployment fund. I have a feeling that the choice is going to be made for me soon enough. We're broke, and HUGE cuts are coming.

Out of money for IDT and AT again. Anybody else experiencing this? Is this just an AFRC thing or is the ANG doing it also?

Out of money for IDT and AT again. Anybody else experiencing this? Is this just an AFRC thing or is the ANG doing it also?


In late Oct??? The navy doesn't pull this crap until Sep :rolleyes:

Out of money for IDT and AT again. Anybody else experiencing this? Is this just an AFRC thing or is the ANG doing it also?

Not possible. IDT monies are congressionally mandated.

True. But it's not available until march is what we heard. Rediculous.

Or is it just an AETC issue?

Strange!! I'm on IDTs now...

Lifter

I've been on IDT several days this month.

More worried about Sequestration in January.

True. But it's not available until march is what we heard. Rediculous.

That is just when we typically finally see the budget. Your FM is in the street.

Our group sucks. They just took our idt's though. Had to convert it all to mpa for the next little while. Pita.

Our group sucks. They just took our idt's though. Had to convert it all to mpa for the next little while. Pita.

They can not "take" your TPs and UTAs. I would ask your group commander for directions to the IG office and see what happens next. This finance disaster in the AF continues to hit even lower lows year after year. I lost some IDT last year, but that is because they were turned back due to me being on long term orders. Then they short notice cnx my orders. I can assure you that this scenario will not happen again to me.

PS I was on IDT 3 days ago so someone is BSing you

They can not "take" your TPs and UTAs. I would ask your group commander for directions to the IG office and see what happens next. This finance disaster in the AF continues to hit even lower lows year after year. I lost some IDT last year, but that is because they were turned back due to me being on long term orders. Then they short notice cnx my orders. I can assure you that this scenario will not happen again to me.

PS I was on IDT 3 days ago so someone is BSing you

Hey Flamer, I am with you. But, on Sept 15, 2012, AFRC took IDT money away that was scheduled because they overspent on MPA and didn't get the EOY funding they expected. So, they did and they can(not legally) take IDT. We have taken your advise, filed an IG complaint against AFRC, and talked to the congressman here. We absolutely agree they are not supposed to be able to take that money. For FY 2013, they are not saying they are taking the money, just not giving it out until March. We do have a few that have burned IDT already this year. They just said "no more". Which means you'll lose IDT because of the 16/quarter limits. Awesome, huh. I'll let you guys know how the IG complaint goes.

They can not "take" your TPs and UTAs.

Does anyone know if this is applicable to the ANG? They have taken unused UTAs from us in late Aug/Early Sept.

Hey Flamer, I am with you. But, on Sept 15, 2012, AFRC took IDT money away that was scheduled because they overspent on MPA and didn't get the EOY funding they expected. So, they did and they can(not legally) take IDT. We have taken your advise, filed an IG complaint against AFRC, and talked to the congressman here. We absolutely agree they are not supposed to be able to take that money. For FY 2013, they are not saying they are taking the money, just not giving it out until March. We do have a few that have burned IDT already this year. They just said "no more". Which means you'll lose IDT because of the 16/quarter limits. Awesome, huh. I'll let you guys know how the IG complaint goes.

I am glad you filed it. We were going to file one also, but we're basically talked out of it by our wing commander. Right or wrong, but we didn't feel like it was going to matter specifically for what happened to us last year. Not sure if you know the full details, but they are using one person's name as a scapegoat even though it was really an FM programs fault IMO. However, we have NEVER been told we couldn't use our federally mandated IDT, so this sounds like a local knee jerk. I'll post here if that changes for us.

Does anyone know if this is applicable to the ANG? They have taken unused UTAs from us in late Aug/Early Sept.

They can return the funds if the IDT periods are not going to be used. This should not occur without your consent.

Hey Flamer, I am with you. But, on Sept 15, 2012, AFRC took IDT money away that was scheduled because they overspent on MPA and didn't get the EOY funding they expected.
Either someone is feeding you a load of crap or you are misunderstanding something. MPA is not AFRC money. It is active duty money, managed and doled out by the active duty MAJCOMs (i.e. ACC). It is not possible for AFRC to overspend MPA because they aren't the ones cutting those checks. RPA is AFRC money and they overspend that regularly, so I assume that is what you are really talking about. Both are "man days", but the money comes from different sources.

He speaks the truth. They took away IDT to pay for MPA. My understanding to this was it just did not happen at DLF.

Strange things are happening in these crazy budget times. Last year we had a reservist UPT student in our flight whose orders were not cut for the entire time at UPT. This wasn't a fiscal year break either. His unit was using the money for something else and did not want to completely fund his orders to tie up those funds for the entire year. They were hoping to get more money in time to cut new orders. Meanwhile the student was spending time getting in touch with his unit, worrying about financial issues and base housing issues and not being the best UPT student he could have been.

He speaks the truth. They took away IDT to pay for MPA. My understanding to this was it just did not happen at DLF.

Strange things are happening in these crazy budget times. Last year we had a reservist UPT student in our flight whose orders were not cut for the entire time at UPT. This wasn't a fiscal year break either. His unit was using the money for something else and did not want to completely fund his orders to tie up those funds for the entire year. They were hoping to get more money in time to cut new orders. Meanwhile the student was spending time getting in touch with his unit, worrying about financial issues and base housing issues and not being the best UPT student he could have been.

I hope his home squadrons DO or SQ/CC went VFR direct to the MPF/Finance/Force development and started kicking junks left and right. That is total BS!

He speaks the truth. They took away IDT to pay for MPA. My understanding to this was it just did not happen at DLF.


I still think you guys are confusing RPA and MPA. RPA is FC50 reserve money which is ultimately the same bucket IDTs come from. They could move that money quite easily. MPA is not even reserve money. It is active duty money. If they overspent, thats their problem to solve. For the reserves to steal "must pay bill" reserve IDT money to give to the active duty (why would anyone give money away?), they would need SECAF approval just to make the transaction. Also not sure why it would/could only happen to a small portion AFRC (didn't happen to us or any other organization that I know of).

Not trying to quibble. The story just sounds like its one letter off. Makes total sense (although still a foul) if it was RPA.

As for IDT money this year, we have ours. Not sure why anyone is telling you there is no IDT money under the CR or why your organization would be any different than mine. We've had no restrictions at all.

No noise at HQ AFRC about restrictions on spending for IDT or RPA. We did go through the last minute orders cnx at the end of last year, though. Last I heard, the CR was good until March.

I still think you guys are confusing RPA and MPA. RPA is FC50 reserve money which is ultimately the same bucket IDTs come from. They could move that money quite easily. MPA is not even reserve money. It is active duty money. If they overspent, thats their problem to solve. For the reserves to steal "must pay bill" reserve IDT money to give to the active duty (why would anyone give money away?), they would need SECAF approval just to make the transaction. Also not sure why it would/could only happen to a small portion AFRC (didn't happen to us or any other organization that I know of).

Not trying to quibble. The story just sounds like its one letter off. Makes total sense (although still a foul) if it was RPA.

As for IDT money this year, we have ours. Not sure why anyone is telling you there is no IDT money under the CR or why your organization would be any different than mine. We've had no restrictions at all.

That was my assumption as well. He meant RPA, but I stand by my comments regarding the fact that the entire FM world is in the street. It's up to people with wings to keep the sanity. Do it.

RPA is correct. Not enough to fund our flyers right now.

RPA is correct. Not enough to fund our flyers right now.

Well, I heard some of these today when I was asking around at work. The one I heard was only allowed to do one IDT period per day. Looks like it is going to get ugly for a little bit. Probably only so we can blow it all at the end of the year on zambonies and other stuff we don't need.

The one I heard was only allowed to do one IDT period per day.

They tried telling our part timers that, let me tell you how that went over! Lots of half day availability now...

They tried telling our part timers that, let me tell you how that went over! Lots of half day availability now...

So they want one specific group (TRs) to take a 50% pay cut. This ought to end well.

Well, I heard some of these today when I was asking around at work. The one I heard was only allowed to do one IDT period per day. Looks like it is going to get ugly for a little bit. Probably only so we can blow it all at the end of the year on zambonies and other stuff we don't need.

I have 3 really cool backpacks and 2 awesome knives, but all I really want is that black matted metal pen that has red ink/ black ink/ and pencil all tied in to one!