Excargodog

…due to retention issues.



https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...tead-rcna81796

rickair7777

At face value, the Army is interpreting the contract correctly. Some folks basically got a good deal in the past due to what amounts to an admin error.

Mil is not prison, never heard of serving your incurred obligations "concurrently"

Excargodog

e6bpilot

It's pretty normal. I was Navy and had two concurrent obligations that played out inside of other obligations. They structure them that way because they are normally shorter "add on" obligations for things like education (masters programs, GI Bill benefits to family) where they want to ensure they get their return on investment for giving you something but don't want to punish you by adding it on to much longer service commitments for things like retention bonuses or accession commitments that can be up to 10 years.

It looks like in this case, a lot of people got a good deal which set expectations that the good deal would continue down the line. Pretty poor form to do it the way they are doing it IMO, but you get the service members you deserve. I know how I would feel if I were planning a transition and then suddenly got extended on active duty.

Excargodog

Yep. And when you are having both recruiting AND retention issues, adding a three year ADSO to what you have been doing seems at best a short term fix that will only aggravate the problem in the long run.


https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-...tion-officers/

rickair7777

Didn't even know the Navy allowed concurrent payback. I did know some guys who declined post-grad (or got an ROTC tour so they could knock it out on their own) because they didn't want to be stuck past their wings obligation.

But yeah, most military personnel contracts are "aspirational", not strictly enforceable. Always subject to needs of service. As excargo said they have to balance short-term with long term when they make these decisions.

Hobbit64

You summed up the army in just a few words.
Well Done
I would click ‘Like’ if there was a button.

Otterbox

That mostly became a non issue when winging commitments went to 8 years from wings and the detainers started manipulating orders lengths to get time at the boat forcing non currency prior to having the opportunity for pilots to get out and on with their lives.

ThumbsUp

For the 24 years I was on AD in the AF, all of my obligations were concurrent. I would have assumed all services were similar in that regard.

Myfingershurt

short term fix that only aggravates the problem? You mean, like extending mandatory retirement age to 67. That sounds right on par with the federal government.